Blog

A half-century ago, there was a universal approach to getting strong. Bodybuilders, weightlifters, and powerlifters performed many of the same lifts and often competed in the other disciplines. Arnold Schwarzenegger, for example, was as strong as he looked, bench pressing 441 pounds and deadlifting 683 in competition. Track and field throwers and football players soon discovered the benefits of pumping iron, and sports journalists became fond of asking NFL linemen, “How much can you bench?”

The nature of sports is that on many levels, “talent prevails,” which is why college athletic programs devote so much attention and money to recruiting. It’s also true that champions can become champions without ever setting foot in a weight room. A baseball player can lead his team in RBIs without pumping his biceps with curls, and a basketball player can become an MVP without doing a single squat. Further, some types of weight training can harm athletic performance. For example, putting a distance runner or a figure skater on the same muscle-bulking workouts that Arnold used to win his seven Mr. Olympia titles is probably not a good idea.

With velocity-based training, the quality of movement is more important than the quantity of weight, so it’s not a question of how much you can bench but how fast you can bench. Share on X

This brings us to velocity-based training (VBT), where the quality of movement is more important than the quantity of weight. From a VBT approach, the question to be answered is not “How much can you bench?” but “How fast can you bench?”

Header photo by Viviana Podhaiski, LiftingLife.com

12 Pioneers of Velocity Training

The following dozen individuals were chosen for their influence on getting strength coaches on board with velocity training. Let’s get started.

1. Yuri Verkhoshansky

Sports scientist Yuri Verkhoshansky is credited with developing a form of advanced plyometrics known as “shock training,” publishing his first article on the subject in 1964.

A track coach specializing in the jumps, Verkhoshansky attempted to duplicate the lower body stress in the various track events indoors by having his athletes perform heavy quarter squats. Working through a partial range enabled these athletes to lift considerably more weight than they could in conventional squats, often two to three times as much. Unfortunately, using such weights created excessive stress on the lumbar spine, and Verkhoshansky’s athletes complained of back pain. His solution was to experiment with a more intense form of plyometrics that didn’t overload the spine.

What distinguished Verkhoshansky’s plyometrics from conventional jump training was that the concentric movement (i.e., leg extension) was preceded by a relaxed state and involved a mechanical “shock.” Stepping off a low platform (so that the quads are relaxed) and immediately rebounding is an example of shock training. This approach enabled the tendons to act as biological springs, quickly releasing the stored elastic energy that developed during the landing. To learn more, invest in a copy of Supertraining by Verkhoshansky and Dr. Mel Siff, along with the more practical book Verkhoshansky wrote with his daughter called Special Strength Training Manual for Coaches.

The problem with shock training is that U.S. coaches often underestimate the stress of this training and don’t understand how to condition the body for it. This causes injuries, particularly overuse injuries, and often poor results. One former U.S. shot put champion told me he tore a patella tendon doing box jumps.

2–4. Alexander S. Medvedyev, Arkady N. Vorobyev, and Robert A. Roman

The translations of these three popular weightlifting sports scientists, among others, gave us insight into the optimal weights to use for explosive training. Unlike powerlifting or strongman, where an athlete has much longer to display their strength, weightlifting requires strength to be displayed as rapidly as possible.

In weightlifting, the amount of weight used in relation to a lifter’s 1-repetition maximum (1RM) determines the intensity. Thus, if a lifter’s 1RM squat is 100 pounds, 100 pounds is 100% intensity. A lift of 85 pounds, no matter how many reps the athlete performs, would still be 85% intensity. These training intensities would be organized into intensity zones. Each zone focused on a different aspect of training. Higher intensities developed strength, and lower intensities developed explosiveness.

The primary intensity zones were divided into 10% increments, such as 50–59, 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, and 90–100. Let’s say a coach is planning workouts for the squat for a month. Not counting sets performed with less than 60% of the 1RM, let’s say the coach decided to prescribe 40 reps. They might distribute the repetitions in this manner:

As a weightlifter progressed, they would perform more lifts in the higher-intensity zones. Whereas a novice lifter might perform only two reps in the 90–100 zone in the clean and jerk in a month, an advanced lifter might perform seven reps. This approach parallels that of sprint coach Charlie Francis, who focused more on higher-intensity workouts with his elite athletes.

For the Olympic lifts, the coach would look at the ratios of these lifts to the squat to determine where to focus their repetitions. It’s a question of balance between strength and speed. If an athlete had a high squat in relation to their clean and jerk, the coach might prescribe lower-intensity squats so they could put more effort into performing an increased number of heavier clean and jerks. If their clean and jerk result was close to their results in the squat, they might perform an increased number of higher-intensity squats.

The Olympic press was a standing press that used the abdominal muscles to help thrust the weight overhead. After the 1972 Olympics, the lift was dropped from competition, leaving the snatch and the clean and jerk. The press was considered an “equalizer” in weightlifting, such that slower but stronger athletes could develop a big lead in the press to make up for a relatively poor showing in the snatch. This new emphasis on speed over strength resulted in significant changes in program design, and many inherently strong athletes gravitated toward powerlifting and strongman competitions.

5. J. J. Perrine

Perrine is credited with developing an isokinetic device that controlled the speed at which a resistance was lifted. This type of exercise was called “accommodating resistance,” such that the trainee could exert maximum effort through the full range of the concentric contraction. Isokinetics became a popular form of resistance training in rehabilitation, as the user could immediately reduce the resistance or safely stop if they experienced discomfort.

The significance of isokinetic training to VBT was that it confirmed the theory that force production is speed-specific. Share on X

The significance of isokinetic training to VBT was that it confirmed the theory that force production is speed-specific. In studies on swimmers, training at slow speeds produced changes in strength at slow speeds but not at high speeds. Training at high speeds increased strength at all speeds, but training at slow speeds produced the greatest strength increases at slow speeds.

For athletic fitness training, consider that acceleration is a component of power. Isokinetic machines do not allow you to accelerate the resistance, thus reducing power. There is also no eccentric component in isokinetic training. Canadian strength coach and posturologist Paul Gagné has studied velocity training extensively, applying this research to his elite athletes. “One problem with isokinetic training is there is no eccentric resistance, which is essential to use the elastic components of the tissues effectively.”

6. Carl Miller

Miller earned a master’s degree in exercise science and was a remarkable weightlifter and coach. He was appointed as the head coach of the 1978 U.S. Weightlifting team at the World Championships and coached weightlifter Luke Klaja when he earned a place on the 1980 U.S. Olympic team. Miller also “walked the talk.” After enduring two spinal fusions by age 41, Miller snatched 281 pounds and clean and jerked 352 pounds! Twenty years later, he cleaned 319 pounds and ran 4.91 in the 40-yard dash.

Miller visited Bulgarian Weightlifting Head Coach Ivan Abadjiev to learn about their training methods, as that country had become a weightlifting powerhouse. Abadjiev athletes won 12 Olympic gold medals and 54 World Championships. In a training camp I attended in 1977, he discussed a unique way that weightlifters could increase their lifting speed.

Power is the amount of work done in a specific amount of time (technically: Power = Force x Distance / Time). Another way to look at power is that it measures the most effective force in athletic movements. Miller cited a force-velocity chart with a vertical “Y” axis representing force and a horizontal “X” axis representing velocity. He said maximum power would equal 50 percent of maximum speed and 50 percent of maximum strength.

Miller suggested that weightlifters who needed to increase their lifting speed would benefit by performing lifts such as power snatches and power cleans at one-half their 1RM. The problem with weightlifting is that the barbell is the sport, and lifting 50% weights doesn’t translate into the technique used with heavy weights. In many Eastern European weightlifting textbooks, weights less than 70% are often not mentioned in workouts since they are considered a warm-up. (Funny story: During a seminar he gave in Rhode Island a dozen years ago, I asked Abadjiev about using submaximal weights to increase barbell speed. He replied, “I don’t want my athletes to lift light weights fast—I want them to lift heavy weights fast!”)

Although Miller’s 50% method didn’t catch on in the weightlifting community, Louie Simmons popularized high-speed training with his “dynamic effort” workouts for powerlifting and sports training.

7. Louie Simmons

One of the most influential coaches in powerlifting was Louie Simmons of the famous Westside Barbell Club. The key to his success was a workout system called Conjugate, which involved using various training methods every week to avoid plateaus. He called one of these methods “dynamic effort,” which involved moving moderate weights as fast as possible.

Louie Simmons believed that focusing on high-velocity training methods in the lifts would enable powerlifters and other athletes to become more explosive. Share on X

Besides dynamic effort workouts, Simmons experimented with chains and bands to increase explosiveness. Although the power lifts are performed relatively slowly compared to the Olympic lifts, Simmons believed that focusing on high-velocity training methods in the lifts would enable powerlifters and other athletes to become more explosive. (For more on Louie Simmons, check out the documentary Westside Versus the World, available on Amazon.com.)

8. Fred Hatfield, Ph.D.

Fred “Dr. Squat” Hatfield was a college professor who squatted 1,000 pounds in 1987. (FYI: The first to squat 1,000 was Lee Moran, who did this at the USPF Senior Nationals in 1984). In 1982, Hatfield introduced the concept of “Compensatory Acceleration,” which entails increasing overload by moving as quickly as possible. He believed athletes would develop maximum power if they thought about moving quickly, even if the weight moved slowly.

9. Ian J. King

Although he hasn’t received the exposure of other strength coaches, Australia’s Ian King produced many thought-provoking books and other resources about strength coaching. King is credited with developing a three-digit formula for prescribing movement speed in weight training exercises. This formula got strength coaches thinking about lifting speed.

Using a bench press as an example, a 421 tempo prescription would mean you would lower the barbell to your chest in four seconds, pause at the chest for two seconds, then press the bar to extended arms in one second. An “X” would mean “as fast as possible.” Thus, 42X means you would press the bar off the chest as fast as good technique allowed.

Later, King’s formula was expanded to four digits by Canadian strength coach Charles R. Poliquin, with the fourth digit representing the pause in the advantageous leverage position (such as when the barbell is held at extended arms in the bench press). Thus, a 42X1 formula for the bench press would mean you would rest for one second with the bar at extended arms before starting another repetition.

10. Jim Napier

Napier was a U.S. weightlifting champion who broke four American records and competed in the 1977 and 1978 World Weightlifting Championships. He wrote several books on velocity training, explaining why speed should not be sacrificed for weight in weightlifting. One comment that summarizes Napier’s ideas is, “I don’t care how much you squat, but how much you can squat in one second!” (I should add that Dr. John Garhammer did pioneering work over four decades ago measuring power in many lifts. For example, he found that the power production for a jerk was nearly five times greater than a back squat or a deadlift.)

11–12. Scott Damman and Bryan Mann, Ph.D.

We should credit these two coaches/sports scientists for helping to popularize velocity-based training, particularly using devices such as GymAware that measure bar speed. In addition to conducting practical research on velocity-based training, both Damman and Mann have promoted VBT methods in speaking presentations as well as articles and podcasts available via SimpliFaster.

Damman & Mann helped popularize a modern approach to velocity training that associated specific intensity ranges with a type of strength. The nature of a sport determines which velocity range to use. Share on X

With this modern approach to velocity training, specific intensity ranges are associated with a type of strength. Drawing from the Bosco Strength Continuum, a load (relative to a 1-repetition maximum) of 15%–40% would focus on starting strength, and a load of 80%–100% would focus on absolute strength. For example, in the off-season, athletes would perform more lifts in a slow-velocity zone; as the season approached, athletes would perform more work in a fast-velocity zone. Here are the zones, progression from slowest (>1.3 m/s) to the fastest (<0.5 m/s):

• Absolute strength
• Accelerative strength
• Strength-speed
• Speed-strength
• Starting strength

The nature of the sport would also help determine which velocity zone was used. For example, most football linemen should focus on developing absolute strength more than a wide receiver or a quarterback. That is, they might perform many of the same core lifts in a workout but at different training velocities. VBT can also be used to precisely assess an athlete’s physical preparedness.

Consider the bench press, a universally recognized predictor lift for American football. In the NFL Combine, the 225-pound bench press for reps is the standard for determining a player’s upper body strength and power. The official record of 49 reps was set by defensive tackle Stephen Paea, suggesting it is primarily a muscular endurance test. Because high-rep bench pressing is ballistic (with the athlete bouncing the bar off their chest), it can be quite harsh on the shoulders. Alternatively, an athlete can perform the VBT bench press test to measure upper body power more precisely.

To review, with the Eastern Bloc training systems used by weightlifters, percentages of the 1RM determine how much you lift. The problem is that some days you can perform better than others. Consequently, the prescribed weight could be too light or too heavy, especially since strength performance can vary daily. With velocity-based training, you can test the velocity of the bar throughout a workout to determine how much weight you should use for a specific workout. According to researchers such as Andrew Fry, it can also be used to determine overtraining, which affects power.

Many others have contributed to modern strength training methods, but these 12 individuals should be acknowledged for helping to “change the game” of athletic fitness training. Before closing, let’s look at how VBT influenced the head strength coach of an Ivy League college.

VBT in Action

Brown University Head Strength and Conditioning Coach Brandon O’Neall oversees the training of 1,200+ athletes in 36 varsity and 12 club sports. About 75% of his athletes use VBT. Here’s his story.

“I was introduced to VBT in 2003 when I played football at Central College in Pella, Iowa,” says O’Neall. “Our strength coach, Jake Anderson, came to us from the University of Iowa and implemented their training regimen with us. He brought with him a Tendo unit—he only had one—and was doing some interesting research on measuring barbell speed, rather than relying on reps, percentages, or asking, ‘How does that feel?’”

Beyond the numbers, O’Neall found that one of the primary benefits of using VBT was seeing how it motivated his athletes. “Instead of going into the workout with the attitude to lift more weight than the person next to them, their approach would be, ‘I want to move this weight faster,’ and get immediate feedback with the VBT units.”

Building on Hatfield’s concept of Compensatory Acceleration, O’Neall says VBT provides a form of competition for his athletes to go into a workout with the ‘intent’ to lift quickly. Share on X

Building on Hatfield’s concept of Compensatory Acceleration, O’Neall says VBT provides a form of competition for his athletes to go into a workout with the “intent” to lift quickly. “You can’t underestimate the value of competition. Take sprinting—you’ll run a lot faster if you race against someone than if you run by yourself.” O’Neall also has science on this side, as several studies found that providing immediate feedback on jump squat performance produced superior results in the standing broad jump and sprints performed for distances of 20 and 30 meters.

In 2011, O’Neall joined the Brown coaching staff when the school finished its new weight room, the Zucconi Strength and Conditioning Center. When it came time to purchase equipment, he told the administration that having a VBT unit at every do-it-all lifting platform in his gym was critical. “I’ve been to places that had velocity training devices and those that didn’t, and it’s really tough to replicate the type of workouts I wanted my athletes to perform if you don’t have the immediate feedback, those measurements, the VBT provides.”

Asked if it was a challenge to implement VBT at Brown, O’Neall replied, “Our athletes are smart. They know that speed of movement is critical—it’s not just how much you can lift. You tell them how to utilize VBT, adjust their rep scheme based on the parameters we provide, and they do it.”

Squats and bench presses are among the most popular lifts performed with VBT units, but O’Neall expanded his VBT toolbox by using it with static and countermovement hex bar jumps. The hex bar is more stable than dumbbells (and the dumbbells tend to bang against the thighs, causing bruising) and provide a better anchor for the VBT ripcord. It’s a good idea.

Squats and bench presses are among the most popular lifts performed with VBT units, but O’Neall expanded his VBT toolbox by using it with static and countermovement hex bar jumps. Share on X

While you can use the VBT training unit alone, such as when performing a squat to get feedback about bar speed, O’Neall says his coaching staff has used it in combination with other technologies. For example, a volleyball player would perform a hex bar deadlift and immediately test their vertical jump on a force platform. This type of contrast training stimulates more fast-twitch muscle fibers to be recruited on the jump (through post-tetanic potentiation). It also provides the athlete with another feedback loop to determine if the weight should be increased or decreased on the next set.

One unique use of VBT at Brown is testing when the athletes return from summer or winter break. Coaches often perform max testing to see if their athletes have been training, giving insight into who is serious about making the team. This approach may add injury to insult, as those who have not been training hard may be at a greater risk of getting hurt with 1-rep max testing. Rather than maxing, O’Neall uses a submaximal percentage of their athlete’s max for squats and bench presses, so they are less likely to injure themselves but test their best results in bar velocity.

“Some athletes may not have access to good training facilities during their break. That’s unfortunate, but I don’t want to put them in a position where they are further behind physically with an injury or mentally by embarrassing them with 1-rep max testing,” says O’Neall. “I’m not here to bring the wrath of Hell upon these athletes on their first day back—I want to provide them with an atmosphere they are excited to be a part of. Yes, they don’t always enjoy all the hard work we put them through, but they reap the benefits of what we have them do and become excited about their progress.”

Finally, O’Neall uses VBT to determine physical preparedness before and after competitions, particularly with football players. “If someone is moving a weight really fast, let’s load them up! If they are moving slower than normal, we back off. In a football game, one athlete may take 60 snaps and the other only 10, but both played that day. We play on Saturday and lift on Sunday, and VBT can help us determine the optimal weights to use based on their fatigue level.”

Other strength coaches may do more or less than O’Neall does with VBT technology, but all have relied on the work of the Iron Game pioneers recognized here. Further, VBT units have progressed beyond the ripcord methods that attach to a barbell to three-dimensional, wireless technologies that are more user-friendly. It’s an exciting time to be a strength coach!

Weightlifting textbooks from the Eastern Bloc mentioned in this article are available through sportivnypress.com. Books by Dr. Mel Siff and Yuri Verkhoshansky are available through Amazon.com.

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

Fry AC, Kraemer WJ, van Borselen F, et al. “Performance decrements with high-intensity resistance exercise overtraining.” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1994;26(9), 1165–1173.

Garhammer J. “Power Production by Olympic Weightlifters.” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1980;12(1):54–60.

Hatfield F. “Getting the Most from Your Reps.” NSCA Journal. 1982;4(5):28–29.

Jones K, Hunter G, Fleisig G, Escamilla R, and Lemak L. “The Effects of Compensatory Acceleration on Upper Body Strength and Power.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 1996;10(4):287.

King IJ. How to Write Strength Training Programs: A Practical Guide. 1998, King Sports International.

Randell AD, Cronin JB, Keogh JW, Gill ND, and Pedersen MC. “Effect of instantaneous performance feedback during six weeks of velocity-based resistance training on sport-specific performance tests.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2011;25:87–93.

Takano B. Weightlifting Programming: A Winning Coach’s Guide. 2012; pp. 54–59. Catalyst Athletics, Inc.

Weakley JJS, Till K, Read DB, et al. “Jump Training in Rugby Union Players: Barbell or Hexagonal Bar?” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021;35(3):754–761.

Injuries are much more than just damage to the body: the cascade of disruptions extends far beyond the field of play and can reach into many facets of life. For many athletes, being injured not only means they’re off the field, but it can also threaten their sense of meaning and personal identity, social network, general life rhythms, and in some cases, even financial stability.

Breathing strategies are not just a great way to enhance the direct rehabilitative outcomes desired during return to play (RTP), but they also can help athletes regain a sense of control and emotional stability while they surmount the many challenges that can accompany unplanned time off from training or play. Due to the central placement of breathing in human psychophysiology, thoughtful use of breathing strategies can help athletes in a holistic way that can enhance the RTP journey across the board.

Because breathing is a nearly universally implementable strategy, it can be deployed with success both inside and outside of standard training and play environments. Share on X

Because breathing is a nearly universally implementable strategy, it can be deployed with success both inside and outside of standard training and play environments. There are opportunities inside more formal environments like training facilities or clinics where breathing exercises can be used for pain relief during treatment or as an efficient way for athletes to stay in shape. Additionally, athletes can use takeaway protocols outside these formal spaces to enhance sleep and recovery or manage pain.

This article will discuss some of the simplest ways to positively impact the return to play experience as well as offer insight for coaches, athletic trainers, and therapists who may be helping to guide the healing process.

State and Stress Management – A Holistic Effect

As an athlete thinketh, so shall they be. Managing the internal state of mind during return to play is no small part of the picture. Injury and the attached mental and emotional stress can test our stress management skillset. As coaches, we often chirp about mindset and attitude, but what tools can we offer our athletes when they are at their lowest?

Discussing concepts like attitude, mindset, and resilience with our athletes is important in general but especially during RTP. Due to the fluid and fleeting nature of how we think and feel, it can be challenging to anchor onto and create a palpable change. A distinct advantage of using breath practices during return to play is that it turns the challenge of modulating internal dialogue into a physical skill. This gets the athlete out of their head and into their body.

Using breath practices during return to play turns the challenge of modulating internal dialogue into a physical skill. This gets the athlete out of their head and into their body. Share on X

In addition to the obvious physical healing process for the injured athlete, the application of breathing techniques during return to play doesn’t just plug holes in the proverbial dam; it can also be an opportunity to examine and bolster shortcomings in their mindset. Breathing techniques can play an indispensable role in this process. The development of enhanced carbon dioxide tolerance, for example, has direct implications for bolstering general resilience due to its effect on deep autonomic physiology.

Of course, the athlete and their team must generalize these lessons to both the return to play process and the chosen field of play. With that said, there is robust research that supports not just the reduction of anxiety (a serious issue in RTP) but, more essentially, the enhancement of overall mental resilience.

Practical Application

There are multiple protocols in the course of this article that are multipurpose in their deployment. For the sake of brevity, I’ll mention two of the techniques described in more detail later in this article and how you can implement them for general stress management and readiness.

These two types of breathing do not serve every athlete with 100% efficacy, but they cover the bases for most and can be deployed without concern of doing harm.

Athletes having trouble managing stress can use either of these two protocols to bookend their day. Five minutes in the morning upon waking and five minutes before bed isn’t too big of an ask and generally gets the job done. Additionally, they can be used to keep the stress bucket from overflowing as needed throughout the day. Even a minute or two can turn the tides of a bad day. Using metrics like heart rate variability and resting heart rate for autonomic tone as well as emotional reactivity can be helpful in better understanding acute changes and trends as a result of using these breathing strategies.

It’ll take a bit of experimentation to get it just right, so be sure to listen to individual responses. If an athlete reports that one protocol works better for them than the other, heed the call. You wouldn’t drive off a cliff just because Tom says to turn right, so don’t get stuck in sunk costs here, either.

Pain Management

Pain is one of the most authentic experiences we can have, and when we are having it, most of our attention goes toward making it stop. Thinking about pain a bit more clearly can help us not only make sense of the entire injury experience but also deploy pain relief and recuperative strategies more effectively.

Having an accessible and reliable tool like breathing at their disposal means athletes in the RTP process feel an enhanced sense of control over their experience of that process. Additionally, other pain management strategies can be costly in time and money. Some, especially pharmacological interventions, may come with a host of side effects that then need to be dealt with on top of the original issue. Breathing strategies are zero cost and have the side benefits of a more balanced nervous system and improved mental state.

Having an accessible and reliable tool like breathing at their disposal means athletes in the RTP process feel an enhanced sense of control over their experience of that process. Share on X

There are two main components to how breathing can reduce the pain experience for the athlete. The first is to normalize hyper-aroused states of the nervous system, which we covered in the previous section on state and stress management. Heightened sympathetic activity, especially in the form of anxious dread (heightened negative emotion about what might happen), has been shown to exacerbate pain responses. It’s been demonstrated, for example, that burn victims anticipating the sting of treatment were more sensitive to pain, but a slow breathing protocol prior to treatment reduced their anxiety (arousal) and made them more receptive to the intervention.

This logic can be used for relief in athletes experiencing anxiety related to the pain or discomfort associated with therapeutic interventions or movement protocols. Reduction in the fear response will calm some of the body’s protective mechanisms and can help with improved integration.

It can be challenging to separate the effects of breathing on general relaxation from pain relief. However, some studies have shown that slow breathing does have a measurable and significant effect on pain reduction, specifically. The precision with which protocols can be separated from one another and their subsequent outcomes relies mostly on contextual cues from both athlete and practitioner. With that said, if any tool creates a reduced pain experience and enhances the efficacy of RTP protocols to no negative net effect on the athlete, by all means, we should use it.

The majority of the research work on this topic has been on slow deep-breathing techniques. However, I would be remiss if I failed to mention promising avenues that use purposeful acute hyperventilation techniques, also called superventilation, that have potential in pain relief as well. Techniques in this category, like the very popular Wim Hof Method, have been shown to release adrenaline into the body during their use. During these states of purposefully increased arousal, pain signals can be suppressed. There are two significant downsides, however.

1. There can be underlying conditions that these kinds of techniques can exacerbate to dangerous effect (anxiety and panic disorders, for example).
2. Superventilation techniques can present a kind of false ceiling for tolerance in the RTP environment and, as a result, contribute to distorted awareness on the part of the athlete.

A preponderance of studies tells us that achieving six breaths per minute (one breath every 10 seconds) for about five minutes can reduce the sympathetic drive for most people. With that said, there are a few ways to skin this cat, and athletes can respond differently to the application of these protocols.

Here are a few that athletes can try immediately before RTP-based sessions or in the morning before coming to practice/therapy.

Box Breathing

Box breathing is an equal ratio of inhale:pause:exhale:pause. So, to achieve six breaths per minute or less, we would do 3:3:3:3. Technically, this is five breaths per minute, but you get the point.

Resonance Breathing

I mentioned this one in my previous article about breathing for recovery, and it applies quite nicely here too. Resonance breathing synchronizes the heart and lungs together to achieve a sort of neurological “tuning”—hence, resonance. It’s also easy to do and remember.

Simply repeat the below sequence for the allotted time:

• Inhale for three seconds.
• Pause for two seconds.
• Exhale for five seconds.

**Note: Athletes who have underlying anxiety may not like prolonged breathing phases. It’s best to let the athlete determine which of the protocols works best for them based on how they feel as long as they’re getting about six breaths/minute.

Improved Recovery

Along the same axis as state management are the improved recovery benefits of breathing techniques during return to play. Recovery is always an essential focus during training and competition, but it moves from coach to first-class seats during RTP. Specific breath training used both immediately before and/or after therapeutic inputs can go a long way toward enhancing recovery from the stress of rebuilding. Therapy places the athlete in structurally and neurologically vulnerable positions, and breathing strategies can help the body return to a more parasympathetic state so more complete healing can occur.

Therapy places the athlete in structurally and neurologically vulnerable positions; breathing strategies can help the body return to a more parasympathetic state so more complete healing can occur. Share on X

Practical Application

Pre Session

Breathing techniques deployed pre-session can help an athlete find a state of autonomic equilibrium, especially if they tend to be anxious about the session in general or anticipate unwanted pain and discomfort.

As a general rule, preparing somebody for work by having them lie down and do something relaxing can be self-defeating, but in this case, it’s necessary. The following protocol can be used for two to three minutes to quell the demons and get the athlete into a more receptive state of mind.

Simply instruct the athlete to:

• Sit comfortably with support as needed.
• Breathe using slow, controlled nasal breaths.
• Find a sweet spot where the exhale is slightly longer than the inhale. (This may take a few breaths.)

I purposefully did not provide a numbered protocol here because this is an opportunity for the athlete to learn to tune their own system. If they come into the session a little too amped up, and the protocol delivered right before doesn’t mesh with their internal mechanisms, it can be aversive and potentially exacerbate their attitude toward the session and breathing techniques as well.

Post Session

After the training/therapy session is over, there’s a bit more leeway. If the session was particularly challenging, have them relax in a comfortable position and use a 3:2:5 (inhale:pause:exhale) for three to five minutes. This use of resonance breathing helps harmonize the autonomic nervous system. Additionally, you can amplify the effects by having the athlete body scan during breathing. If they find a place where they’re holding tension, they can gently squeeze and relax the area during the two-second pause.

Before Bed

Athletes who sleep better recover better—period. However, pain and positional sensitivity can disrupt sleep for athletes in RTP and potentially interfere with ideal healing. Performing slow and controlled nasal breathing in bed (without a screen!) can help slow the car down on the way to the intersection rather than just slamming on the brakes. This will set the nervous system up for a successful transition to sleep. As a bonus, athletes who wake from discomfort overnight can also use this as a go-to for helping them get back to sleep or at least suffer less from sleep anxiety.

There are lots of options here. It’s up to you as the practitioner to listen to the needs of the athletes in your care and deploy the solution you feel best solves the problems you and your athlete face—and what’s more, the one the athlete will actually do!

Use During Therapeutic Intervention

Biology has two prime directives: survive and replicate. In that vein, the job of your nervous system is first and foremost to protect—to protect you from outside harm and to protect you from, well, you. It’s obvious when you say it out loud, but many rehabilitative strategies fail to take this first principle into account and, consequently, get limited results or contribute to other surreptitious compensatory processes.

Breath constraints during the application of movement rehabilitation techniques or skillset reintroduction give practitioners direct insight into how the nervous system receives the prescribed inputs in real time. Remaining ignorant of these subtle hints won’t necessarily interfere with achieving results altogether, but it can certainly limit efficacy and precision.

The opportunity to have a deeper dialogue with the athlete about how their body is adapting to the inputs is not to be scoffed at. The perception of high performers regarding both their interpretation of discomfort and personal readiness is often skewed. Hurry up and get back to normal so “I can be me” is a common sentiment that builds a house of cards ready to collapse at the next breeze.

Slow nasal breathing with good breath mechanics is a great indicator light for practitioners and offers athletes a way to self-regulate during especially challenging tasks during return to play. Share on X

Slow nasal breathing with good breath mechanics is a great indicator light for practitioners. At the same time, it offers athletes a way to self-regulate during especially challenging tasks during return to play. This time can be especially frustrating for athletes, and providing a goalpost is conducive to a more robust healing outcome. This keeps athletes from taking a “task completion” attitude toward the process. Along with that, it’s important to educate them as to why they are breathing this way. Hold them to the standard, and don’t let them skate!

Practical Application

A slow, smooth, and full nasal breath is a beautiful force multiplier in RTP for athletes and coaches and a good place to start when applying therapeutic inputs. Asking an athlete to maintain purposeful breathing keeps the autonomic nervous system from going into overdrive. This can mean more meaningful results during the session because the nervous system feels safe.

More often than not, when targeting especially challenged tissues or ranges, athletes grind through the exercise from one breath hold to another. These apneic events are a clear sign from your nervous system. Back off half a step and be a little nicer. Effort is good, but precision is better.

In some instances where novel or especially challenging interventions are being used, there can be cause for purposeful exhalation from the mouth. You should pay attention to cringing, gasping, wheezing, huffing, puffing, panting, or otherwise involuntary adverse reactions to the stimuli and generally avoid them. Return to play is not an outlet for the prowling sadism of coaches or therapists. Be precise and do no harm.

Deviations from these standards don’t necessarily mean you need to jump ship on the RTP approach you’re employing, but it does allow for a more precise reconciliation of the neurological message of “don’t do that” and intelligently pushing thresholds. There are some obvious cases where you’re dancing on the edge of what the athlete can manage in the moment. In those cases, deliberate exhales through the mouth can be particularly helpful in modulating arousal responses that exacerbate pain, avoidance, and compensation.

The key word in the previous sentence is deliberate. Deliberate activation of breathing muscles lights up a higher part of the brain and keeps the athlete in an attentive response state rather than a reactive one.

During high challenge/pain potential, use slow, smooth nasal breathing as much as possible. Unconscious deviation during execution shows a change in neurological tolerance. When dancing on thresholds of progress, deliberate exhalation can help manage the pain response in real time.

When dancing on thresholds of progress, deliberate exhalation can help manage the pain response in real time. Share on X

Simple Simon

All of this is not to say that if you don’t integrate breathing strategies, you won’t get results from RTP. We know that’s not the case. But using these strategies thoughtfully, you can get more precise indications of protocol success, at least neurologically, and therefore be more precise with your outcomes.

There are many opportunities to integrate breathing techniques into return to play processes. You don’t have to and may never use them all. Keep it simple, Simon. Find what works for your style of coaching/rehab and dovetail the tools appropriately. Regardless of where and when you integrate breath control into your RTP approach, it’s most certainly a powerful force multiplier that will enhance your existing toolkit and enrich the athlete’s experience.

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

Resources

Jafari H, Gholamrezaei A, Franssen M, et al. “Can Slow Deep Breathing Reduce Pain? An Experimental Study Exploring Mechanisms.” The Journal of Pain. 2020;21(9–10):1018–1030.

Busch V, Magerl W, Kern U, Haas J, Hajak G, and Eichhammer P. “The effect of deep and slow breathing on pain perception, autonomic activity, and mood processing—an experimental study.” Pain Medicine. 2012;13(2):215–228.

A team of 30 athletes walks into the weight room. Since you last saw them 48 hours ago, each of those 30 athletes has lived a completely different life. Each one is in a different state of wellbeing, driven by the choices they made over those hours. Athletes have to decide whether they ate enough or brace themselves through another plate of dining hall food; whether they should finish their assignment or go to bed now to be ready for practice tomorrow morning.

These choices affect the readiness of the body to train the next day. Wellness questionnaires are a great tool for initially screening athletes to understand their readiness. In my previous article, I expanded on how I use focused questions to extract the most meaningful information with wellness questionnaires. In this article, I will expand on how to integrate questionnaires into an operational monitoring system that has set checkpoints for protecting athlete wellbeing.

Individual readiness is part of what makes team sports challenging to work with—a multitude of factors are at play and various stakeholders hope to control them. Each stakeholder has their methods and input into the final product:

• Sport coaches have practices, competitions, film sessions, and more.
• Athletic trainers have rehab sessions, preparticipation screening, coverage of practice, and more.
• Strength and conditioning coaches have weight room sessions, speed sessions, conditioning sessions, and more.

Individual readiness is part of what makes team sports challenging to work with—a multitude of factors are at play and various stakeholders hope to control them, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Athletes are pulled in different directions. Each make their own choices and respond differently.

Varying responses lead to different degrees of wellbeing for each athlete. Asking each athlete how they feel before each training session takes time, something strength and conditioning professionals do not have a lot to spare. Wellness questionnaires are a tool that coaches can use to screen athletes and focus their attention on those in the most need of their time.

Combining subjective and objective information signals athletes who may feel something is wrong or objectively a measure is telling you something is wrong. Combined with a coach’s experience and expertise, coaches can provide the proper modifications to training and/or recovery, if necessary, to protect the health and safety of the athlete.

Questionnaires need to ask streamlined questions with unambiguous answer choices. The questionnaires I use ask about the athlete’s current level of fatigue, mood, the quality of the previous night’s sleep, and how many hours of sleep they got the night before. The first three questions—fatigue, mood, and sleep quality—are the subjective questions. These are up to the athlete based on their interpretation of their own body.

The response system for these questions removes ambiguity. They have three possible responses: below average, average, and above average. In that previous article, I argue that this system increases the signal by increasing the concreteness and relatability of the answer options. A fifth question can be added about resting heart rate for centralized data collection. With resting heart rate added, there are two objective questions.

The subjective questions signal when athletes feel something is wrong, while the objective questions signal when their body is telling them something is wrong. Once signaled, coaches can use their experience and expertise to provide the proper modifications to training and/or recovery, if necessary, to protect the health of the athlete.

Operational readiness systems create change by impacting decision-making, while non-operational systems are just for show. The following will provide steps to enact an operational readiness monitoring system.

Operational readiness systems create change by impacting decision-making, while non-operational systems are just for show, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Making the System Operational

Every strength coach has the same goals: more resilient and effective athletes. Creating change means applying a stimulus as an external load that creates a responsive internal load. Training is the application of stress to athletes. Their readiness comes from the ability to recover from the previous stressors. Wellness is the athlete’s health, and readiness is defined as an athlete’s ability to perform. Both are impacted by previous training, sports competitions and practice, sleep, nutrition, and many more factors.

An operational monitoring system determines the athlete’s wellbeing through multiple measures. Coaches then utilize expertise, experience, and evidence to respond to the state of an athlete. As always in this field, context is king. When making a system operational, factors that must be accounted for are:

• The sport
• The number of athletes
• Recovery and nutrition resources
• Time of year
• Current goals

The objective of any readiness system is not to make decisions, but to provide support to conversations about those decisions around the development of more resilient and superior athletes.

Operational wellness monitoring systems:

1. Provide information

• Combine subjective and objective information
• Measure multiple systems

2. Guide discussions about training modifications
3. Enhance training outcomes by responding to an athlete’s capability to train

Measuring the Multiple Systems Involved in Readiness

The complexity of the human body offers decision-makers a high degree of uncertainty. Facts that reduce uncertainty are information. Data can become information by quantifying systems involved in the complexity that is trying to be understood. Extracting information from data revolves around the ability to simplify it to a point that can be interpreted. Enough data points must be mapped to paint a clear picture of the most impactful complements to the complex system.

Painting clear pictures requires building a battery of sources from specific systems with large effects on the wellbeing of the athlete. Wellbeing has psychological and physical roots. The psychological systems involved are the athlete’s mind and thoughts. Physical systems involved in the recovery process between training are the central nervous system, the musculoskeletal, and many more.

On the psychological side in the readiness equation are subjective questions. The human mind is incredibly powerful, and a person’s perception can drastically alter the physical outputs of the body. Understanding an athlete’s own reflection on their status with subjective questions informs the practitioner on where they feel they are at. There is commonly a link between their physical status and perception of this status, but inaccuracies here must be understood as they require a specific approach from the coach.

The human mind is incredibly powerful, and a person’s perception can drastically alter the physical outputs of the body, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Objective measures cut through the ambiguity of perceptions to the true status of the body. The central nervous system (CNS) ties into every other part of the body. The CNS is highly involved in readiness due to its widespread effect. Heart rate measures like resting heart rate or heart rate variability provide information on autonomic nervous system function. Information can be gathered on the stress response and recovery drive of the nervous system. The somatic nervous system (SNS) is the branch controlling the muscles. Testing the SNS sheds light on the maximal output that the athlete is capable of, which can include (but is not limited to) counter-movement jumps, depth jumps, and isometric mid-thigh pulls.

Recovery between training is important, as insufficient recovery with constant training pushes athletes down the hole and eventually off the cliff. Sleep is the most important input to recovery. Subjective sleep quality informs coaches on the effectiveness of sleep, and the total hours of sleep informs how much recovery time has been available. Hours of sleep are not effective without sufficient quality of sleep, so understanding both components can help coaches catch problems before they start rolling downhill.

Combined, coaches have quantitative data on psychological wellbeing, autonomic status, residual fatigue of the somatic nervous system, and how well and long they slept. Putting all this information together is no easy task.

The Workflow

Being efficient with your time is important. A specific workflow helps with the effective implementation of the monitoring system. Questionnaire data informs on the possible status of the athlete while the testing allows the athletes to prove they are ok.

The first step in data collection is when athletes fill out their questionnaire in the morning and it is collected in one central location. This data then populates a dashboard and is the first checkpoint on the path to making decisions. Experience and context help with interpreting information from the data that the athletes present.

Experience and context help with interpreting information from the data that the athletes present, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Athletes are pooled by their status into compromised and normal readiness groups. Both groups have different thresholds for scoring readiness tests. This provides more or less wiggle room based on their responsiveness to previous training. The criteria for grouping is the number of red flags they have, which can come from any of the four broad categories of data:

• Subjective perceptions
• Sleep
• Resting heart rate
• Extra comments

Generally, a “red flag” in any two or more of these categories changes their readiness group. One red flag with a declining history of readiness might also change their group. These are not hard rules but general guidelines. The groupings are then translated onto the readiness testing Google Sheet through dropdown boxes on the sheet.

The second phase of the workflow is testing. After the warm-up, the athletes conduct multiple trials of the readiness testing. For example, I have previously used a counter-movement jump on a Just Jump Mat. Athletes then used an iPad to input their jump height. Using an automatic analysis formula, the sheet would automatically report the next steps for the athletes. This analysis is modified by thresholds set by the group the athlete is in. The next step would be one of three options:

1. Normal results testing prompted athletes to continue with the training session as planned.
2. A significantly different readiness test result prompted athletes to check in with me.
3. An extremely different result promoted athletes to check in and automatically reduced their training volume.

This check-in is the second checkpoint where conversations can be had based on guidance from the data. From there, multiple options are available based on the information and context like modification of training, counseling on recovery practices, or prescription of additional recovery modalities.

Analysis

Analyzing the data is a way of answering questions. To get to the important questions, basic questions like who is viewing the report and when they view it must be answered first. Second, specific questions like what information is needed in their decision-making process must be answered next. The analysis needs to be as streamlined as possible. Creating reports and workflows that allow for near-immediate communication of the impactful information is important to give you more time coaching and not analyzing.

Context

Reports should be built specifically for the person making decisions and the decisions they have to make. Sport coaches and strength and conditioning coaches have different jobs and need different information. Different time-periods have different objectives requiring different decisions to be made; the two big time-periods are in-season and off-season.

Reports should be built specifically for the person making decisions and the decisions they have to make, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

In the off-season: Off-season readiness boils down to the question, “Is the athlete recovering enough to keep building?” The goal of the off-season is building up better athletes. Building requires time to build, which the body does during sleep.

Questionnaires provide the checkpoint to counsel athletes on their sleep. Athletes who more frequently have better quality sleep and/or sleep more hours in total have higher responses to training. During training, stress is applied to athletes and heart rate measures inform of the stress response. Resting heart rate changes acutely and over the last week can help you catch someone who is struggling to keep up, getting sick, or is highly stressed. Whatever the reason, these are great points to check in with that athlete. Remember, it’s the off-season—they will be sore and tired, but training must go on.

During in-season periods: Readiness becomes a daily checkpoint in-season. Are the athletes going to be prepared to perform at their best given the training program between now and the competition? After the competition, central fatigue can manifest for 72 hours afterward. Readiness motioning and testing allows for verification that the athletes have recovered or are in the process of recovering in time for the next competition.

Athletes can only help us win if they are healthy. You can help keep them healthy by fine-tuning training to meet them where they are at. In-season all metrics have value. A comment from the athlete or a flagged score in any of the categories of sleep, resting heart rate, or subjective wellbeing will place them on a list. Everyone on the list gets an initial check-in prior to training with two or more flags adapting their readiness testing thresholds.

This modification increases the chances they have to check in again and that modifications will be put in place. This is all done because sport practice is the most important component for preparing athletes for competitions. While weight room training might not be the root of the problem, modifications reduce the total stress on compromised athletes while allowing them to practice fully.

Sport practice is the most important component for preparing athletes for competitions, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Reports for sport coaches: When reporting to sport coaches, they need to know one thing: can their athletes practice. Understanding that coaches do not have a background in exercise science is critical. Adapting metrics to be intuitive is important for your success. Sport coaches understand one thing—the game. Presenting metrics as percentages of their max or normal value is more intuitive for coaches to understand.

Additionally, coaches do not need all the metrics. They need the one, maybe two, metrics that best summarize the status of the athlete. Reports should be in formats coaches understand best. Some like graphs and charts, while some like numbers. Get to know your coach and report your data in the way they can best receive the key information they need for their job.

Reports for S&C: An S&C coach’s combined expertise in physiology, knowledge of the context, and understanding of training allows them to interpret meaning from the data. More data points can be digested, and data should be reported in raw value form and with context using z-scores. For each athlete, you should be able to see what their resting heart rate is (72 bpm) and the z-score of that heart rate for that athlete (1.21).

For each athlete, you should be able to see what their resting heart rate is and the z-score of that heart rate for that athlete, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

This gives the context of what is their norm and how different is this data point. This provides the information for discussions. Questioning athletes on why their heart rate was 1.21 standard deviations above normal will not resonate, but explaining, “Hey, I saw your heart rate was 72 this morning, how is everything going?” will go over much better. On the other hand, only reporting the raw data does not provide the context to know this is not normal for this athlete. Reports can use tables and graphs for the quick analysis of trends over time, while conditional formatting gives visual cues of what needs to be examined further. In short, reports for S&C coaches need to provide them with the information to do their jobs.

Simplicity

Unless you are a sport scientist, chances are you did not get into this field to stare at spreadsheets all day. Simple and automatic workflows will reduce the amount of time spent staring at spreadsheets. With a budget, Athlete Management Systems and other software options make things very simple for coaches. Without a budget, learning how to get the most out of Excel is needed to make things simple. Straightforward workflows are possible with Excel. Connections between spreadsheets, power queries, and different formulas will allow for the building of dashboards that report with the click of the refresh button.

Connections between spreadsheets, power queries, and different formulas will allow for the building of dashboards that report with the click of the refresh button, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Creating an operational monitoring system starts with the goal of enhancing athlete health to further increase the effectiveness of training. Using objective and subjective information, along with readiness testing results, provides the information that improves the understanding of an athlete’s status. Using data points over various physiological systems improves the signal from the very complex interactions in the body. Understanding the context of the situation allows the development of very specific questions that need to be answered with the data.

Automatic workflows with helpful visualization techniques improve the simplicity of analyzing data. Together, the hope is that coaches can better modify training to the individual athlete’s ability to handle the load at that given moment. Healthier athletes will have a better chance of helping to win games, the ultimate goal of team sports.

Lead Photo by Bradley Rex/Icon Sportswire

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

The project was to take 19 high-level sprinters and investigate the association between varying data points that could be collected utilizing the Plantiga and VueMotion software.

The sprinters were tested over 20 meters from a block start position. Data was collected on their takeoff and landing accelerations out of the blocks and the first three strides, and additionally on the time taken to run 20 meters in nine of the athletes.

The hypothesis was that there would be a high correlation between sprinting time over 20 meters and peak acceleration, ground contact time, time to first step, and total takeoff acceleration amongst the athletes. The investigation was also set up to test whether other correlations existed between takeoff and landing force, as well as landing forces and peak acceleration and time to 20 meters.

The Equipment

The Plantiga device was used across all 19 athletes, and VueMotion only over nine. I have written about Plantiga in two previous articles for SimpliFaster, which can be found here and here, where we demonstrate the technology’s utility for determining acceleration outputs in the sprinting stride.

VueMotion is an automated software tool that uses video capture uploaded from your mobile phone. It then automatically breaks down the data into usable visual and objective metrics.

In this article, I only utilize the VueMotion to obtain the time to 20 meters, though there is so much more you can use VueMotion for in athletics. Find out more on the VueMotion website.

The Athletes

The athletes, aged 16–26, were all specialist 100m sprinters who compete at the national level. Their legal wind personal bests ranged from 10.23 to 11.1, putting them in the top echelon of their age group nationally.

The Data Collected

The table below summarizes the data collected from the Plantiga for the 20-meter acceleration across the 19 athletes. Due to extenuating circumstances, the VueMotion was only captured in nine of these 19 athletes, and we were able to achieve further correlations using this data.

With only 19 athletes tested, we must consider the analysis with a grain of salt. However, with the publication of this as a start, and support from Plantiga, I hope this can be collected into a better example of normative ranges that coaches and athletes can utilize in the future to gain inferences on their starting technique compared to other athletes.

What Does the Data Show?

We utilized a Pearson’s correlation coefficient calculation across multiple pairs of data collected from the table in figure 2. The first table below (figure 3) displays the significant correlation values with peak acceleration.

Figure 4 displays the significant correlation values with time to 20m.

Looking at the data, there are many things obvious to the coach and a number of interesting items as well.

The data we gathered shows many obvious things to a coach, but also a number of interesting items. Share on X

The ground contact time of the first step out of the blocks, total push accelerations out of the blocks and first three strides, push acceleration out of the blocks only, and push acceleration from rear block only first and third steps only were all highly correlated with peak acceleration and time to 20m.

This makes sense: the better push out of the blocks and push acceleration of the first three strides led to a better time over 20 meters and acceleration.

What was interesting was what was not correlated…

What Does the Data Not Show?

The table below outlines a number of correlations that did not reach significance but theoretically may have been expected to.

Front Foot Push Out of the Blocks

While the rear foot takeoff acceleration out of the blocks was significantly correlated with 20-meter time and peak acceleration, the front foot takeoff acceleration was not.

Second Step Takeoff Push Acceleration

While the rear foot takeoff acceleration out of the blocks, along with the push acceleration of the first and third steps, was significantly correlated with 20-meter time and peak acceleration, the second step was not.

Interestingly, the front foot and second step measure the same leg, whereas the rear, first, and third steps also measure the same (opposite) leg.

This leads to a number of questions:

• Could this be an area for training focus?
• Could an improved Reactive Strength Index (RSI) of the front foot improve outcomes, or is that leg not as important as the rear leg in block starts?
• If a coach wants to be the most efficient in their intervention, should they focus mainly on developing the takeoff acceleration capability of the rear block leg, as this has a better predictive outcome of yielding better 20-meter start times?

With only 19 athletes, the data is presented to promote discussion, not conclusions—but the art of coaching will find these variables interesting to manipulate to get the best results.

Total Landing and Pushing Accelerations

Total landing accelerations showed no correlation with any of the data sets. The instruction often given to athletes is to hit the ground to push back up—but certainly, in the first few steps, there is no need for that instruction, as there is no correlation. That is not to say there is no correlation in other phases of the sprint cycle, but this warrants more investigation.

Out of the Blocks

Takeoff acceleration from the blocks (front and rear) was significantly correlated to time to 20 meters, yet the push accelerations of the first three steps were not. This demonstrates the importance of pushing out of the blocks in the first 20 meters, particularly from the rear foot, as mentioned earlier.

Ground contact time on the first step and time to first step (TTFS) were moderately correlated, though not significant. This data set would be worth monitoring with more athletes tested to determine conclusions.

Time to first step did not correlate with peak acceleration or takeoff push accelerations from blocks, all three steps, or a combination of both. This suggests that the limb velocity required for a rapid TTFS is a separate skill from the acceleration-dependent skills of the takeoff accelerations that are highly correlated with peak acceleration and time to 20 meters.

Project Summary and Surprises

This study set out to determine which sprint metrics within the first three strides correlated highest with sprint performance to 20 meters. Not surprisingly, the takeoff (push) accelerations correlated the most, but significantly, this was with the leg starting in the rear block position, not the front position, when considering the block start and the first three strides.

Coaches have long placed the stronger leg on the front block due to its longer contact time at takeoff out of the blocks. This study suggests rear leg takeoff acceleration should instead be the focus. Share on X

It has long been the rule among coaches to place the stronger leg on the front block due to its longer contact time at takeoff out of the blocks. However, this study suggests a low correlation to performance for this limb position compared to the rear leg takeoff acceleration.

Perhaps greater emphasis needs to be placed upon which limb has the greater ability to create horizontal force from a position of more hip extension, as this has the highest correlation with sprint performance to 20 meters.

Finally, the ability to have a short ground contact time at first step was predictive of better 20-meter times and peak acceleration than the technical skill of time to first step. In fact, TTFS had no correlation with sprint performance or takeoff accelerations, leading us to question its importance as a metric in this study. However, a short TTFS is usually associated with a more acute shin angle (angle made by the tibia to the track), which aids the horizontal direction of force application. Perhaps when Plantiga is able to differentiate the horizontal force application on its own (currently in development), this metric may find significance.

Coaches can use these findings to make their block sessions more efficient by focusing on the variables that have the highest correlation with performance: ground contact time of the first step, rear block push-off, and developing takeoff (push) acceleration from that leg.

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

Although athletes are the ones who stand in the arena, we know that the influence of their coach on their performance is massive. Coaches are responsible for guiding athletes toward their maximum potential—often for much less recognition—which has led to coaches being viewed as “performers in their own right.”

This suggests that, like the athletes they’re developing, coaches need to consider their own performance:

• Can they make effective decisions under pressure?
• Are they providing sufficiently effective feedback?
• How does their body language influence the athletes?

By taking a high-performance view of how their coaching is “performed,” coaches can better develop their athletes. High performance, however, can also be difficult and stressful. Research has demonstrated that sports coaches are at a high risk of burnout due to various factors: physical demands, time away from family and friends, long hours, fear of negative athlete performance, often a lack of job stability, and managing conflict with others. Similarly, rates of mental health issues in elite coaches are not low.

This is somewhat of a paradox. Coaches know how to deliver high levels of performance in elite athletes: they know the influence of injury and illness on performance and the importance of a good diet, adequate sleep, and rest. They understand the principle of periodization, whereby the overall volume and intensity of the athletes’ workloads are varied across the training year. They know the importance of recovery to allow athletes to realize their potential. And yet, for a variety of complex reasons—personal, social, organizational—they often don’t apply the same principles to themselves.

If the coach is a performer in their own right, can we actually say with confidence that they are a high performer if they are stressed, burned out, and tired, asks @craig100m. Share on X

If the coach is a performer in their own right, can we actually say with confidence that they are a high performer if they are stressed, burned out, and tired? Can we rely on them to make good decisions under pressure? Can we rely on them to handle the physical loads of a long season or a high-pressure championship?

Job Performance and the Performance Pyramid

The above questions percolated through my brain as I read “The Making of a Corporate Athlete,” a 2001 article published in The Harvard Business Review and authored by Jim Loehr and Tony Schwartz. Earlier this year, I was the team leader for an important competition. I was ultimately responsible for the health, safety, well-being, and performance of more than 80 athletes and staff. I was aware of the need for me to be able to make good decisions under pressure, so I made an effort to ensure my lifestyle—both while away and in the lead-up to traveling—was set up to allow that. Even though their article was aimed more at those with traditional office jobs, the advice from Loehr and Schwartz was helpful to me as I prepared for my team leader role, and I think it is beneficial for all coaches.

Loehr and Schwartz highlight that the majority of organizational and occupational performance research is primarily psychological in nature; it focuses on the neck up and, in their opinion, omits the role played by physical capacities. To overcome this, Loehr and Schwartz developed the performance pyramid, in which each level influences the other, and failure to address one level compromises overall performance.

Similarly, coaches tend to focus on the long term when working with their athletes, aiming to maintain high levels of performance over a career. The career of a coach can, in many cases, be much longer than that of an athlete, meaning that coaches need to consider how they can achieve sustainable personal high performance over a 20-, 30-, 40-, or even 50-year career.

The purpose of the performance pyramid is to support coaches (or “corporate athletes”) to achieve the ideal performance state. Much like there is a zone of optimal functioning for athletes in the arena, Loehr and Schwartz maintain that a similar construct exists for coaches. The foundation of the ideal performance state is the ability to effectively manage energy, whereby we oscillate between stress (energy expenditure) and recovery (energy renewal). While we might consider stress to be a negative thing, it actually isn’t; stress allows us to grow, develop, and adapt. Instead, the bigger issue is a lack of recovery—a concept familiar to athletes.

Stress actually isn’t a negative thing; stress allows us to grow, develop, and adapt. Instead, the bigger issue is a lack of recovery—a concept familiar to athletes, says @craig100m. Share on X

From a physical standpoint, Loehr and Schwartz highlight that coaches need to be able to perform at a high level in the conditions in which they find themselves. In track and field, coaching at a major championship can include a lot of walking, often in high temperatures and/or across long days; as a coach, are you physically prepared to handle this?

On a personal note, I have a very dodgy back resulting from a chronic injury that eventually led to my retirement from sports. To ensure I could perform optimally in my role as team leader, I knew I had to be in a position where my back wasn’t a limiting factor. As such, I had a rehabilitation plan in place for months before traveling and an emergency management plan should I have a flare-up. Similarly, a coach I know prepares for major championships by upping their walking loads for the 12 weeks before the competition, ensuring they can tolerate the loads they will experience once there.

In short, being able to match the physical demands of the environment means that you are likely to be a more effective coach and are better able to buffer the effects of fatigue to make good decisions. Finally, physical training is actually a really good way to support mental health and well-being, making it an important part of the high-performance coach’s toolkit.

Staying with the theme of physical capacity, Loehr and Schwartz highlight the importance of sleep and good nutritional habits in optimizing the performance of coaches. Just as we ask athletes to get plenty of sleep each night and optimize their diet, coaches should do the same. We know that burning the candle at both ends and having a diet high in fat and processed foods won’t support high-performance athletes, so why should it work for coaches? This is an area in which researchers and practitioners alike are becoming increasingly interested, as evidenced by a recent paper.

The Emotional, Mental, and Spiritual Layers

Next, Loehr and Schwartz look at emotional capacity, which they define as the internal climate that supports peak performance. This is a really useful way of presenting it, and it highlights the importance of strong, healthy foundations, which in turn allow for high-performance actions to be built on top in support of performance. According to Loehr and Schwartz, the key to this is to maximize the experience of positive emotions (e.g., calm, challenged, engaged, focused)—which provide energy—while avoiding the energy-draining effects of negative emotions (e.g., frustration, resentment, anger). A potential key to this is having and maintaining positive relationships outside of sports; having clear boundaries between work and home can optimize satisfaction in both areas.

The third level of the pyramid focuses on mental capacity; here, Loehr and Schwartz focus on enhancing the cognitive capacities of those they work with. This includes developing their time management abilities, critical thinking skills, and ability to focus. A research paper from 2010 highlights how a mental skills training program—comprised of six workshops aimed at providing coaches with the skills to operate effectively under pressure—assisted coaches in their own performance.

Athletes often work with sports and performance psychologists to develop their ability to perform under pressure by utilizing skills such as goal setting, imagery, and relaxation…why can’t coaches? Throughout my sporting career, I’ve seen a number of coaches sabotage—completely unintentionally—the performance of their athletes by not being able to control and manage their emotions when under pressure. It seems counterintuitive to spend time developing your athletes and getting them to the biggest stage only to undermine your own time and efforts (and those of the athlete) by harming performance at the last minute.

Finally, Loehr and Schwartz’s last pyramid layer is spiritual capacity, which they define as “the energy that is unleashed by tapping into one’s deepest values and defining a strong sense of purpose.” To me, this is about knowing what you stand for and staying true to that.

As an example, in early 2014, in the lead-in to the Winter Olympics, I was the fifth man in a four-person bobsleigh team. It was clear that, by my competing for a place on the sled, the team’s performance was suffering, and rightly or wrongly, I felt blamed by some team members for that. Ultimately, I wasn’t having a good time—I didn’t feel comfortable, and there was no fun involved.

In the end, I requested to be moved from that team onto the second team in a bid to try and get them to qualify for the Olympics—something that we ultimately achieved. I made that decision because I wanted to be someplace where I was having fun, felt comfortable, and had a strong sense of purpose—things that were missing on my previous team. Being able to identify your values, and aligning your behavior and environment in support of them, will provide you with the energy required to deliver your best work—making you the most effective coach you can be.

By supporting their own performance, coaches can increase their effectiveness and, in turn, better serve the athletes they work with—the goal of all high-performing coaches, says @craig100m. Share on X

All of this serves to demonstrate that, like athletes, coaches should think of themselves as high performers and develop their ability to deliver high performance effectively. Coaches are uniquely positioned to do this well, given their knowledge of developing high performance and frequent interactions with performance support practitioners, all of whom have their own areas of expertise. By supporting their own performance, coaches can increase their effectiveness and, in turn, better serve the athletes they work with—the goal of all high-performing coaches.

Six Key Habits

How can coaches optimize their performance?

1. While periods of intensification (e.g., major championships) are unavoidable, the key aspect is for coaches to manage their energy—both acutely and across the performance year. This requires systems and processes to be in place to support recovery, much like the planning processes coaches go through with athletes. Being able to periodize your energy across the performance year should assist you in being a more effective coach.
2. Have a physical training plan aimed at optimizing readiness to meet the demanding conditions in which they perform, just like their athletes. Being in good physical health can buffer the effects of fatigue and stress and ensure the coach can make good decisions under pressure.
3. Aim for sufficient sleep each night to support recovery, and ensure a nutrient-rich diet.
4. Develop and maintain clear boundaries between “work” and “home,” allowing time for adequate recovery and a focus on developing relationships with family members.
5. Consider working with a sports or performance psychologist to develop your mental skills and capabilities, enabling you to perform better under pressure.
6. Identify your core values, and ensure that your behaviors and environment align with these.

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

Strength coaches are familiar with bands when it comes to strength development. Bands are hooked on a bar to increase tension at the top of the range of motion for a squat or bench press. They can also be used as assistance for pull-ups, as well as drills specifically targeting the hips and shoulders. For the purpose of this article, I won’t get into the use of bands for strength development; instead, I’ll go over how to use bands specifically for speed and power development.

There are other tools available for adding or removing resistance, such as the 1080 Sprint, but most coaches do not have access to that type of tool. Even if you do have one, it can be difficult to cycle groups of athletes through any one piece of equipment. Bands provide a relatively cheap and effective way to improve speed and power for individuals or groups of athletes.

Bands are great for adding resistance, but they can also be a fantastic tool for removing resistance when necessary. Share on X

Any piece of training equipment is only as good as the manner in which the coach applies it. For the most part, bands are an underutilized piece of training equipment. They are great for adding resistance, but they can also be a fantastic tool for removing resistance when necessary. I always look for ways to minimize verbal cueing to get my athletes to move how I want them to move, and bands allow me to do just that. For example, if I need an athlete to create a more powerful initial push, I can have them perform a drill where they have to overcome band resistance at the outset of the movement.

Using Bands for Speed Training

There are two main uses I have for training with bands:

1. To try to teach the athlete to be quicker off the ground—this happens when an athlete is being assisted in accelerating out of a cut.
2. To try to improve stability and power when the band is pulling an athlete into a change of direction.

When deciding how to progress or regress exercises, always begin with the end goal in mind. In a previous article, I spoke about the importance of unilateral power development—that is the end goal with all of my athletes. Effective change of direction happens when an athlete can plant a foot into the ground and rapidly stop and redirect force in the direction they want to move. This rapid deceleration and subsequent reacceleration only happen with a quick and powerful foot plant. I want my athletes to learn to be quick and then transfer that quickness into more and more power. This particular aspect of changing direction can be significantly improved through training with bands.

Video 1.Moving toward or away from the anchor changes the intent of the drill.

The above clip demonstrates how using band resistance can assist with change of direction, as seen in the first portion of the video. In that case, initiating the movement away from the anchor point increases band tension, which helps the athlete get in and out of the change of direction. Initiating movement toward the anchor has the opposite effect and adds more speed to the movement. This challenges the athlete’s ability to rapidly stabilize and produce force quickly.

As coaches, we should never stop looking for ways to help our athletes improve. I view every speed drill as an assessment. I need my athletes to develop quickness and then learn how to transfer that quickness into power. Easily, the number one cue I use with my athletes is “move faster.” Athletes may think they are moving fast, but there’s usually a little more they can give in terms of speed and power in training. They need to understand what it feels like to truly move fast.

That’s where a drill like a band-resisted shuffle (the first drill in video 1) is such a great movement—the athlete will shuffle away from the anchor point and immediately shuffle back to where they started. As they shuffle away from the anchor, the resistance of the band increases. This increased band resistance unweights the athlete and helps them be quicker when initiating the change of direction to shuffle back toward the start of the drill.

Now that the athlete has the feeling of being quicker, you can progress them by performing the shuffle from the opposite direction (the second drill in video 1). This is an example of the second way I like to use bands in my training. In this case, I’m accelerating an athlete toward the anchor point of the band. Accelerating into a cut forces more stability and power when getting in and out of that cut quickly.

In a drill like this, you don’t need much resistance to get the desired effect. If an athlete is able to perform the drill well by maintaining a good position and quickness off the ground, then I have them slightly increase the resistance at the start of the drill. I want my athletes on the edge of working really hard to be quick off the ground but not give them too much resistance where it looks like they get stuck in the cut.

Progressing Speed Drills with Bands

Progressing speed drills using bands is as simple as increasing the distance you cover within the drill. More tension on the band equals a greater distance to overcome if you are moving away from the anchor point. If you are moving toward the anchor point, the more stretch you have on the band, the more you will increase your acceleration toward the anchor. When performing a drill where you are continuously moving out and back, a greater acceleration toward the anchor will make the change of direction much more difficult.

Progressing speed drills using bands is as simple as increasing the distance you cover within the drill. Share on X

Video 2. Train deceleration with bands by using them to accelerate the athlete into an abrupt stop. Then progress that drill by adding in a sprint out of the change of direction. 

One of the methods I like to use prior to performing a drill where an athlete moves out and back is just to have the athlete sprint toward the anchor and perform an offset stop with a high amount of acceleration from the band (the first drill in video 2). This allows the athlete to get used to handling higher amounts of force over shorter distances. If you are in a gym with minimal running space, this is a great way to simulate running at slightly higher speeds. Once the athlete performs that drill a few times, you can progress it by having them sprint toward the anchor, slam on the brakes, and sprint back out in the same direction they came from.

Getting in and out of a change of direction quickly like this requires high amounts of power, strength, and stability in this position. The bands provide a great tool for athletes to demonstrate this type of positional strength.

Video 3. Bands are an effective tool for adding or removing resistance when changing vectors. 

Another reason for using bands for speed and power development is the ease at which you can change vectors while adding resistance or accelerating yourself into a cut. Most sports are not primarily linear or lateral—athletes move forward and backward at a variety of angles. Bands allow you to train these particular angles easily.

Another reason for using bands for speed and power development is the ease at which you can change vectors while adding resistance or accelerating yourself into a cut. Share on X

Video 4. Bands can be useful for training starting acceleration.

Although I have primarily focused on change-of-direction training with bands, they are also great tools for training linear speed. In most sports, athletes don’t reach top speed in competition. They often need to slow down or change direction. It’s rare to have an opportunity to run in a straight line for 40 yards without decelerating or changing course. This fact makes acceleration even more important in terms of athlete development.

I particularly like to use band-resisted three-step bursts with my athletes. Starting with a little bit of resistance encourages my athletes to stay low and create a good angle of projection. With each step, the resistance from the band increases a little bit, which continues to encourage my athletes to stay low and push hard to maintain horizontal projection.

Using Bands for Power Development

Repeating jumps continuously, jumping with weights, and jumping off higher boxes are the most familiar ways to progress plyometrics. You can also use bands to improve your athlete’s ability to produce high amounts of force over a short period of time.

The same principles that apply to using bands with speed training can also apply to using bands for power development. You can use bands for power development in all directions by employing lateral, anterior, posterior, and vertical forms of resistance.

Video 5. This is a great drill to use at the beginning of a plyometric program. It helps develop tissue quality while allowing the athlete to take advantage of the stretch-shortening cycle. 

Bands can be particularly effective for training young athletes. Progressing younger athletes from countermovement jumps to depth jumps over the course of a single off-season is not a smart progression in terms of long-term athletic development. Going right into pogo jumps can be a little too difficult for younger athletes to execute effectively because they lack the elasticity to take advantage of the stretch-shortening cycle and get off the ground quickly.

This is where band-assisted drills can be beneficial. Performing a drill like a band-assisted pogo jump is a great place to start in terms of getting athletes to develop a sense of using the stretch reflex. Drills like this are also great for larger athletes, such as American football offensive and defensive linemen. Larger athletes are known for being able to produce a lot of force, which is great, but their tendon strength may not be developed enough for jumping right into an intense plyometric training program.

A general consensus for progressing plyometric training is to either add load to the jumps or increase the eccentric force on the landing of a jump. This is often done by stepping down off a box and performing a jump vertically. While this is great for improving force vertically into the ground, it does not account for much of the horizontal nature of power in field sports.

I previously mentioned how rare it is for an athlete to run in a straight line for an extended period. Therefore, it is imperative that athletes improve their ability to develop force horizontally in all directions. Effective change of direction happens when an athlete plants their foot into the ground away from their center of mass. By doing this, the athlete creates a better angle for projecting out of a cut. Striking closer to their center of mass will lead to a more vertical shin angle and less effective acceleration.

Video 6. A drill like this is effective for mimicking the higher speeds an athlete may have when getting in and out of a cut.

An athlete performing a drill like the one you see in video 6 should focus on getting as much distance as possible horizontally while spending as little time on the ground as possible. That same concept leads to better deceleration and acceleration when changing direction.

Video 7. Using band resistance with a side-to-side pogo jump allows you to add more force horizontally. 

Additional Benefits of Training with Bands

A further benefit of using bands is that you can easily increase or decrease the resistance by simply moving closer to or further away from the anchor point. It is important to note that too much resistance is not a good thing. Are you training speed or strength? Think of a sled. If the sled is so heavy that you have to march with it, are you really improving your speed?

Put just enough tension on the band to challenge the athlete, but not so much that it greatly affects how they move. Share on X

The same concept applies to training with bands. If you put too much tension on the band, you may notice that the speed drill you are trying to perform begins to look a little sloppy. Put just enough tension on the band to challenge the athlete, but not so much that it greatly affects how they move. Begin each drill with a model of the movement you want to see performed. Adjust the band accordingly to challenge the athlete while still performing the model of movement you want to see.

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