Blog

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

By Joey Guarascio and Chad Herring

Information is money! The more info coaches have, the more better-informed decisions they can make. Coaches, like everyone, are living in an information-saturated era, which can be overwhelming at times. It’s hard to have tunnel vision on any specific topic when there are 10 new tabs of research articles open on your computer, a podcast of the next guru on pause, and the book you just ordered on your desk—not to mention Twitter, which has more opinions than any one coach can sift through. I have been that coach who feels the anxiety of the learning process because, at the end of the day, we coaches only have enough room to mentally digest a certain amount of info.

The current surge in sports technology has afforded strength and conditioning coaches many positive breakthroughs in training and has also given us a concrete way to validate that the prescribed training is working. Prior to this explosion of technology, S&C coaches were handcuffed to qualitative assessments such as how “tough” a team was with really no way to judge this outside of competition results.

The growth of technology, though, has also brought with it an abundance of data, leaving many S&C programs without a concrete plan on what to do with all these numbers. Enter the sport scientist. While many S&C programs simply assign sport science responsibilities to one of their staff members, a true “sport scientist” is educated and dedicated to “the study of sport using scientific methods of inquiry in the fields of human performance, athletic endeavor, and sporting competition”¹ (p. 36). The sport scientist does this by collecting, organizing, and analyzing data in order to make better-informed decisions, with the ultimate goal of maximizing performance in competition.

The effectiveness of an S&C program can now be evaluated through the ability of the sport scientist to supply actual data-driven feedback. Using real analysis, the sport scientist can determine the impact of the strength and conditioning coach’s programming on performance metrics and injury resiliency. No longer are S&C coaches writing programs and guessing that what they prescribed is working—this recent tidal wave of data leads to more accurate and progressive training regimens.

Time is our most critical asset, and data saturation can waste crucial time if coaches collect data purely for data’s sake. The information that we collect must be actionable and usable. Share on X

Although there are many benefits to this new flood of technology and information, it’s not all positive. The strength and conditioning profession, at least from my viewpoint, is seeing a rise in unskilled and uncharismatic coaches on the floor. At the end of the day, it is a person-to-person profession, so soft skills like personality, relatability, likability, and integrity are necessary. Understanding how to create macros in Excel is a valuable skill, but it will not increase the ability to coach a sprint or connect with a player and should always remain secondary to the purpose of the job. Time is our most critical asset, and data saturation can waste crucial time if coaches collect data purely for data’s sake. The information that we collect must be actionable and usable.

This article is a case study of my tenures as Head Strength and Conditioning Coach at Colorado State (CSU) and Florida Atlantic (FAU) and how in both positions we used technology and the accumulation of data to create action plans—and how, in many cases, we wasted a bunch of time. Everything written in this article was either a breakthrough or more frequently a great idea on paper that turned into a mistake made entirely by me. From claiming that we had four guys over 23 mph to showing my coach fancy graphs, I have made every mistake with data that you can imagine.

Using these successes—and in many cases, glaring failures—I can share these experiences to provide wisdom as it pertains to using data with more success in the Division 1 football environment. This is a dual-authored article, as my Director of Sports Science, Dr. Chad Herring, contributed to these “do’s and don’ts” of data collection and GPS usage.

Do Not Claim and Post Football Players Running Over 23 MPH

Every strength and conditioning coach wants to have a player who is elite in some performance metric, whether it is the 600-pound squat, the 400-pound clean, or the player that runs 21+ mph. The problem with this is threefold:

1. It only satisfies the coach’s desires.
2. Accuracy or technique most often gets thrown out the window.
3. A lot of times it does not have much significance for the win/loss column.

Speaking from experience as the coach who has posted, for a lack of a better term, bullshit numbers early in my career without validation or filtering out inaccuracies, it only backfires when your 24-mph guy runs 4.6 at Pro Day.

The fastest guys at the highest level of football rarely run over 21 mph. Not to discredit all players out there, but hitting 23 mph in a game with the ball is a “once-in-a-season” event for the entire nation. There is a rise in speed training at the college level, but having 20+ players over the 22-mph mark would be insane.

When all else fails, use common sense…if the movie Terminator taught us anything, it’s not to blindly trust the machines, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

GPS is not always accurate, as we have seen fluctuations at times due to the earth’s orbit or plane interference. Video overlap and analysis of acceleration graphs should paint a better picture. When all else fails, use common sense: if a player hits 23 in a game and runs a 1.03 fly 10, well, as much as we would love to state that player super-comped in the game, it’s probably just an error. If the movie Terminator taught us anything, it’s not to blindly trust the machines.

Do Use MPH to Drive Effort and Competition

There are few things more effective for motivation and producing higher levels of effort than challenging a group of football players to see who’s the fastest. Coaches relentlessly strive to create motivation and garner better efforts from players—personally, the most effective way I’ve seen to motivate players is with Tony Holler’s Record, Rank, and Publish method.

Being at the bottom of the rankings, no matter what the metric, always produces higher effort out of that bottom group. As a competitor, something about seeing your name last just burns a hole in you. For our skill players, one way to rank and compare them is by listing the top mph of the day and rewarding the top guys with distinction at the next team meeting.

The beauty of having data and technology is that you can give quantitative reinforcement to training enhancements and make sure that the retention of these new abilities is kept. We know when a player breaks an mph record in practice or hits a peak deceleration personal record. The ability to reassure that what we train is improving is one of the best motivators and drastically increases buy-in.

The beauty of having data and technology is that you can give quantitative reinforcement to training enhancements and make sure that the retention of these new abilities is kept, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

We use a blowhorn at practice for 20-mph runs, and when the horn goes off, the entire strength staff drops down and does 20 push-ups. This entices the players to give better effort, and they seek that reward of being acknowledged for superior effort on the field; plus, it’s a great way to give your strength staff a pump—especially during kick-off period.

Do Not Claim That You Prevent Injuries

Stop claiming that your data prevents injuries—just stop! No one can prevent an injury. We can build robust and strong athletes who can tolerate stress and load. We can increase the technical proficiency of the position. We can make extremely informed decisions about training that provide safe load prescriptions and yardages. But even with all that, athletes will still get hurt—it’s part of the sport.

Strength and conditioning coaches, alongside sport scientists, have been able to help sport coaches mitigate many potential scenarios where athletes can get hurt, but it is impossible to erase the danger of injury. This is the reason every athlete signs liability waivers: injuries happen. Good training, paired with sound progressions for practice, can make an enormous difference in how long that injury report is. The advantage of modernizing practices and training methods is we have seen a sharp decrease in “self-inflicted” injuries, meaning injuries related to overuse.

The entire high-performance unit, including the S&C, sport science, and sports medicine departments, has a duty to reduce the risk of athlete injuries as best as they can. However, as mentioned above, the only way to truly eliminate the risk of injury is to have athletes stay in bed all day and never train or compete in their sport (still risking bed sores in this scenario).

On top of training, following the basic principles of specificity, overload, and progression, there are various ways in which the S&C coach and sport scientist can reduce the risk of injury. While the list of methods to mitigate injury is extensive, examples include:

1. An in-depth needs analysis of the sport, position, competition level, etc. to ensure athletes are training with the proper intensities and volumes.
2. Staying on top of the latest literature surrounding various movements and injury mechanisms in the respective sport.
3. Performing injury and training program audits.
4. Workload monitoring (a term that’s gotten a bad rep but can be effective when utilized properly).

Do Check Your Data and Information for Accuracy

Although we have certain technologies that upload data directly into the cloud, we also have several assessments that we record manually, such as vertical jumps and various sprint/decel/change-of-direction drills.

An easy accuracy check to begin with is sorting the data from high to low. A vertical jump of 28 inches can easily be input as 82 inches. While we obviously try to avoid these errors, this is not uncommon and can be easily corrected by referencing our data collection sheets. We also follow the sorting method using our GPS data. I’ve seen max velocity values over 25, 30, and even 100 mph. Although I’d love to claim how effective our speed training is in improving an athlete to more than 100 mph and call myself Dr. Speed, any max velocity over 24 mph is immediately removed from the report.

Where checking for data accuracy starts to get more difficult is for values that are not outside the realm of possibility. For instance, while I don’t doubt that several practitioners have seen vertical jump improvements of multiple inches when assessments are performed several weeks apart, an improvement of this magnitude in our setting in which we jump multiple times a week is unlikely. An easy accuracy check to combat this issue is to create recording sheets with previous personal bests to immediately compare values. If an athlete’s previous personal best was 31 inches, and he jumped a 37 out of nowhere, a simple “accuracy” check is to ask the athlete to jump again. If he jumps 30 or 31 inches on this re-jump, there’s a high likelihood of inaccuracy for whatever reason, and so we’d simply disregard the 37 inches.

Where checking for data accuracy starts to get more difficult is for values that are not outside the realm of possibility, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

This may be due to the technology, or it may be due to an inaccurate jumping technique. For instance, using Just Jump mats, I’ve seen my fair share of athletes pike in the air or bend their knees upon landing to increase flight time, and consequently, jump height. Although there’s a level of subjectivity here, practitioners should do their best to follow strict protocols in order to collect accurate data.

Regarding GPS data, our first check when an athlete hits over 20 mph is to see who that athlete is. As athletic as some of our offensive linemen are, I doubt the accuracy of any of them running more than 20 mph during practice or in a game, and I would consequently flag this data point.

In situations where there is a possibility of the athlete running that fast, we go back and look at prior assessments. Has this athlete run over 20 mph before on multiple occasions using the same GPS technology? If so, I can be fairly confident that this velocity is accurate.

In situations in which an athlete is new to wearing GPS technology, we can go back and look at prior assessments. Did this athlete run a fly 10 of 0.93 seconds this past summer? If so, a max velocity of over 20 mph in pads seems likely. A fly 10 of 1.15 seconds without pads on? That’s not so likely.

Another accuracy check using GPS is to use video overlap. By accurately tracking periods, quarters, halves, etc., we can check when a spike in max velocity occurred. With the help of our Video Coordinator, we can obtain a clip of this play, overlap this video with the graph of the athlete’s velocity, and determine with a high level of confidence if the athlete hit that max velocity or not. Did the 21 mph occur when the athlete was jogging to the numbers during a media timeout? Likely an inaccuracy. Did the 21 mph occur fractions of a second after an interception as the athlete was trying to outrun the pursuit angle of the quarterback? High level of confidence that this was an accurate max velocity.

Furthermore, an accuracy check I’ve personally begun using this semester has been to measure max velocity alongside max acceleration and max deceleration. Did we see a max velocity of 22 mph at the same instantaneous time we saw a 9.05 m/s max acceleration and a -9.63 m/s max deceleration? If so, there’s a high likelihood of an inaccuracy somewhere along the data-signaling pathway, consequently causing me to flag the data.

Do Not Give Coaches Complicated Material

In 2014, I landed an assistant spot at the University of Mississippi under Paul Jackson. Up until this position, I had only worked at small schools with limited resources. The fanciest piece of equipment I had worked with was Pandora Plus (seriously).

Coach Jackson has an extremely organized outline of each assistant’s specific responsibilities that aid the department, giving autonomy and ownership outside of on-the-floor or on-field coaching. I was in search of my specific responsibility when, one day, I was appointed to the role of Tech Guy. Mind you, I had never in my young career used any tech nor did I have any knowledge of the technology afforded to us.

For young coaches, the lesson in this story is this: Whatever role you are given, dive in headfirst and don’t be timid. Find the leading experts in the field and beg them for time and wisdom. Become an expert after thoroughly experimenting and researching whatever niche is afforded you.

We ended up purchasing Zephyr accelerometers and GPS units. I was so excited the first time we strapped them on, but then came the realization…what now? I was so happy that I could turn the systems on that I didn’t even think of the most important part, which is interpreting the data and recommending interventions.

I figured out how to print out a report, which was about 30 metrics on an Excel sheet in chart form, and I handed it to Coach Jackson. He looked at me and asked what it meant. Immediately, I understood that I had a steep mountain to climb. Thankfully, I found great mentors like Ted Lambrinides and then tracked down the work of Tim Gabbett and Fergus Connelly.

Eight years later, I’m still no expert, but I can use the data for actionable interventions. I can also interpret it for our coaches to aid in athletic performance. Complexity and an impatient world do not mix.

Sport coaches are experts in their sport, not in sport science. They need information that matters. They don’t need how many times the running back turned left or their average acceleration. They need to know how their guys or girls are doing. Not only do they want to know how these athletes are doing, but if they aren’t doing great, what are some recommendations to fix the problem?

The coaches I have worked for have never asked for fancy graphs or predictive Excel sheets; they need actionable information, and they need it ASAP, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

The coaches I have worked for have never asked for fancy graphs or predictive Excel sheets; they need actionable information, and they need it ASAP. The reports I have made in the past took many hours to create and had fancy functions but didn’t inform the coaches in a way that affected planning. I felt like I was rewriting Supertraining with how intelligent I would be perceived by the coaches, but they couldn’t understand it and became deaf to the information.

To date, the most effective system we’ve managed to steal is a labeling model using simple green, yellow, and red colors. Pick the five most important metrics that apply to your circumstances. For us here at FAU, when analyzing practice, our five are:

1. High-Speed Distance (skill—WR/DB/RB/TE)/Collisions (bigs—OL/DL/LB)
2. Total Distance
3. High-Intensity Accelerations/Decels
4. Body Weight
5. RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion)

If the athletes are one standard deviation above their average in more than three metrics, they are categorized in the red. This means that the athlete is being chronically or acutely stressed past their average load tolerance to where they run the risk of being injured. If the athlete is close to their average, they are in the green category, meaning we are in the sweet spot for that specific training period. If an athlete is below by one standard deviation, we categorize them as yellow, which means that they are detraining and need an appropriate stimulus once we start to reach the end of the residual period of that capacity.

Coaches get a list of guys that are in each category, with a brief explanation of why and solutions to the existing problems, and that’s it! The main questions to ask are: Is it efficient and Does it work in aiding change?

Do Run Real Statistics on Your Testing Data

Every S&C coach wants their program to work. We want kids bigger, stronger, and faster. For a lot of coaches, this is their driving force and passion. Their self-worth hinges upon positive results. Sometimes, the program written does not yield the results that coaches want, or even causes maladaptation and negative results from training.

The human body is extremely complex. It is made up of many different biological systems that all respond differently, with different recovery rates. Add in the daily stressors of life, and that makes it extremely hard to guarantee an outcome of all positive results. No one wants to be wrong, especially in the ego-driven world of coaching, but it’s not about how you feel—it’s about how to make the athlete better.

Every coach should audit their program systematically throughout the training calendar. Coaches need insight into the rate and significance of positive and negative in the performance metrics. Trends always emerge, and it’s on the coaches to spot these trends to either provide alterations if they are negative or continue on the path provided if they are positive.

Do Not Just Use Player Load and Yardage to Determine Load

While we track both player load and yardage during training, practices, and games, practitioners should understand that these metrics are volume metrics. Because intensity is the driver for adaptations in the body, we place an equal, if not slightly greater, emphasis on intensity metrics, such as:

• High-speed yardage
• Hard acceleration and deceleration efforts
• Inertial movement analysis (IMA)
• Impacts

Since the ultimate goal is to adequately prepare athletes for competition, practitioners should work backward from the game to perform a needs analysis for their athletes. By doing so, the performance staff can adequately track both volume and intensity over time, ensuring there is a balance between the two and flagging athletes who exceed specific thresholds.

While we flag both volume and intensity metrics in our program, the majority of our athletes are affected to a greater degree by intensity metrics as compared to volume metrics, both subjectively using RPEs and objectively using vertical jumps. For instance, we have some skill athletes who can regularly exceed 7,000 yards in a practice without much detriment to their central or peripheral nervous systems, while the same athletes struggle following a day with 300 high-speed yards and/or a player load of greater than 600.

Density is a metric that GPS technology can easily track or calculate, and it should be included in regular athlete monitoring, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

Furthermore, density is a metric that GPS technology can easily track or calculate, and it should be included in regular athlete monitoring. For instance, a metric like player load/minute is one that we track and report on daily. While the team can have an average player load of 300 on different days, the day that has a player load/minute of 3.5 will be much denser, and therefore more intense, than the day with a player load/minute of 2.5.

While tracking the automatically calculated density metrics from the GPS software is the most straightforward approach, practitioners can also simply divide any of the chosen GPS metrics by the time of the activity to get the density. Additionally, without performing any other calculations (for those who are not math-inclined), practitioners can easily look at density from week to week if practice start and end times are similar enough. For example, last Tuesday’s practice and this Tuesday’s practice had the exact same duration, with last Tuesday’s practice totaling 400 hard acceleration efforts and this Tuesday’s totaling 300; therefore, last Tuesday’s practice was denser.

Do Track and Monitor Decelerations

For years, practitioners and researchers alike have noted the importance of horizontal acceleration in multidirectional athletes. Recent research—specifically articles published by Damian Harper—has highlighted the importance of horizontal deceleration. As noted by Harper et al.,³ horizontal deceleration ability underpins rapid change-of-direction maneuvers, with a higher deceleration ability potentially enabling an athlete to create and/or close down space to a higher degree. Furthermore, intense decelerations create greater mechanical load than both intense accelerations and high-speed running and may increase the risk of time-loss injury if not managed appropriately.³ Consequently, we’ve placed a heavy emphasis on deceleration training, both during our fieldwork and in the weight room, and have assessed and monitored various deceleration metrics.

Our primary methods of monitoring and assessing deceleration are a deceleration-specific field test and max deceleration and hard deceleration efforts using our GPS technology. The former consists of the athlete sprinting with maximal intent to a specific marker (cone, yard line, etc.). Immediately upon reaching the marker, the athlete decelerates in as short of a distance as possible (e.g., 3.5 yards). Although we also assess deceleration capabilities subjectively using our coaching eyes, this is an easy and effective way to objectively measure horizontal deceleration capabilities.

We typically use this specific field test during the off-season, and we assess bilateral, left-leg, and right-leg capabilities to ensure there are no glaring asymmetries. While there are various ways to adjust this field test—increasing/decreasing the sprint-in distance, decelerating to a lateral stance position, etc.—coaches should ensure maximal intent is given during the sprint-in to the marker. We’re currently exploring using timing gates during the build-in to ensure the athlete hits a certain threshold of their acceleration capabilities, such as 90% of their 10-yard sprint start.

Using GPS, we track both max deceleration and hard deceleration efforts (quantity of decelerations above 4.0 m/s²threshold) during the off-season and in-season. Monitoring these metrics is vital due to the high mechanical stress that occurs during decelerations. As noted by Harper et al.³, there are almost three times the amount of ground reaction forces (GRFs) that occur during a max horizontal deceleration as during a max horizontal acceleration. Anecdotally, we’ve seen a positive correlation between subjective measures of training using RPEs and hard deceleration efforts.

Furthermore, although we’re still analyzing the data, we’ve seen a reduction in max deceleration capabilities during a training block placing a heavy emphasis on eccentrics, including supramaximal eccentric loading and accentuated eccentric loading. Practitioners can expect to see a dip in max deceleration during an eccentric training block before super-compensation occurs.

Do Not Just Buy Into One Model

Just as practitioners can get stuck in the mindset that one and only one approach is best for enhancing sports performance (e.g., block vs. linear periodization, parallel vs. sequential vs. emphasis training models, etc.), practitioners can also view their model of collecting, organizing, and analyzing data as the only way.

Although there are certain basic principles that should be followed regarding different facets of data integrity, practitioners should choose the methods that best fit their environment. Share on X

Although there are certain basic principles that should be followed regarding different facets of data integrity—such as the standardization of data collection, choosing assessments/technologies that are both valid and reliable, and the avoidance of p-value hacking—practitioners should choose the methods that best fit their environment. For example, while one performance staff may strongly believe in the use of the acute:chronic workload ratio and Tim Gabbett’s “sweet spots” and “danger zones” for injury risk⁴, others may view this as an “inaccurate metric” with no evidence to support its alleged ability to reduce injury risk⁵.

Furthermore, the constantly evolving world of sports performance requires coaches to continue learning, growing, and developing—if an individual buys into only one model or mode of thinking, they risk being left behind.

The constantly evolving world of sports performance requires coaches to continue learning, growing, and developing—if you buy into only one model or mode of thinking, you risk being left behind. Share on X

The same can be said for everything surrounding data in the sports performance world. While some technologies have been around for decades, others explode onto the scene and then just as quickly disappear. For example, if you’re known as the “force plate man/woman,” and your entire performance model is built around this technology, what happens if a newer and better technology comes along? What happens if you move into an environment that doesn’t have a force plate?

While members of the high-performance unit, and specifically the sport scientist, should absolutely know and stand by what they believe in, they should also constantly explore and perform unbiased research on other models and be prepared to make minor adjustments along the way.

Lead Photo by Jason Mowry/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

References

1. French D and Torres Ronda L (Eds.). (2021). NSCA’s Essentials of Sport Science. Human Kinetics.

2. Bahr R and Krosshaug T. “Understanding injury mechanisms: a key component of preventing injuries in sport.” British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2005;39:324–329.

3. Harper DJ, McBurnie AJ, Santos, TD, et al. “Biomechanical and neuromuscular performance requirements of horizontal deceleration: a review with implications for random intermittent multi-directional sports.” Sports Medicine. 2022;1–34.

4. Gabbett TJ. “The training-injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder?” British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2016;50(5):273–280.

5. Impellizzeri FM, Tenan MS, Kempton T, Novak A, and Coutts AJ. “Acute: chronic workload ratio: conceptual issues and fundamental pitfalls. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2020;15(6):907–913.

Dr. Chad Herring joined the Florida Atlantic University Football program in May 2022 as the Director of Sports Science. Prior roles include serving as the Director of Performance for DIA Sports Performance (private sector), Head Strength and Conditioning Coach at Angelo State University (NCAA Div. II), and a seasonal Strength and Conditioning Coach for the Tri-City ValleyCats (Houston Astros minor league affiliate). Chad earned his B.S. from Ithaca College, M.Ed. from Angelo State University, and Ph.D. from the University of Central Florida (UCF). While at UCF, he worked on various sport science projects with the Men’s Soccer, Women’s Rowing, and Women’s Volleyball teams. Additionally, his dissertation was completed with the UCF Softball team, titled “Utility of novel rotational load-velocity profiling methods in collegiate softball players.”

As technology continues to evolve, it’s only natural that innovation makes its way into the health, fitness, and performance arenas. However, in an age of noise, many unnecessary wearables, overly deterministic data, and gimmicks, it can be challenging to parse through which innovations really have something and which are superfluous poppycock.

A new performance innovation I’ll be reviewing today is the Speede resistance training machine. Please note that as a practitioner, like many of you, I encounter countless gadgets, pieces of equipment, and fit tech. I have other practitioners ask my opinions on different pieces of gear, and sometimes I write my opinion about something if I get asked about it enough.

This review will be equal parts me painting a picture of what the technology can do and showing you how I program Speede into my workflow. If you’re a personal trainer, strength coach, athletic trainer, rehab specialist, or athlete, Speede is a unique training tool absolutely worth looking into to determine if it’s a good fit for you.

What Does Speede Do?

Speede is a computer-driven training station that essentially combines a myriad of movement pattern capabilities with a multimodal stimulus.

The setup looks similar to Tonal, with a computer screen, personalized tracking software, and various setups for its cable arms and attachments, including a barbell, handles, and a hex bar.

Video 1. Bench press using maximal strength isokinetic mode. The machine adapts to the athlete’s force output at every moment, in real time.

Speede offers a Swiss Army knife of movement patterns, load/resistance/speed options, attachments, exercise, data collected, and guided training for those working out on their own, says @coopwiretap. Share on X

That’s essentially where the similarities end, as Speede offers a Swiss Army knife of movement patterns, load/resistance/speed options, attachments, exercises, data collected, and guided training for those working out on their own. As one example of the differences, Tonal’s weight capacity is 200 pounds, whereas Speede’s resistance capabilities go up to 2,000 pounds. I would say Tonal is aimed at very entry-level gen pop, whereas Speede is designed for coaches, teams, and athletes (though it does serve the full spectrum all the way to gen pop/rehab).

Key Modes

Speede offers multiple modes, each offering truly unique benefits.

1. Standard Isotonic Mode

This is the typical resistance you’d feel from a cable machine or free weight that enables you to go smooth and fast, like a Keiser Functional Trainer had a baby with a Concept 2 Rower. This mode is awesome and immediately renders typical and air-resisted cable machines obsolete by consolidating this feature into Speede’s offerings. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by COOP (@rewirehp)

Video 2. Trunk integration work with Speede on isotonic mode.

Now that you know what it does, I’d say this is my most commonly used mode. That’s just me personally, as in my own practice, I bridge the gap from rehab to performance, so we spend a lot of time training up both the kinetic (load, velocity, force, strength, power) and the kinematic sides (how the kinetics is executed or the biomechanical/movement piece). Video 2 is an example of me doing trunk integration work (or an example of our “core” training) on foot to better link the kinetic chain. Here, the main emphasis is connecting the lateral line to the opposite glute/leg. If you’re familiar with the myofascial systems, ala Anatomy Trains, you may program similar things to innervate tissues (muscles and fascia) meant to cooperate in real time.

It’s also nice in that I’ve been able to consolidate some of my selectorized equipment (e.g., a hamstring curl machine) to free up space in the facility.

In terms of data, Speede features velocity-based metrics, which are helpful to have consolidated in one machine for a lot of movements. Before, I would have had to use separate modalities (like a Push Strength band) to get the job done. I’ll be honest—I wasn’t doing a lot of VBT monitoring recently because it was a pain to manage different data sets and set up different technology. I still rely on the eye test for some more obvious things, but now that this metric (and others) has been made much more convenient/automatic, it’s easier to include.

2. Isokinetic Mode

This features maximal strength isokinetic resistance and will no doubt be the go-to for filling the needs of maximal strength deficits and body composition. The gist is that the machine literally adapts to your own force output in real time, matches your force output, and then stimulates you through the entire range of motion. This means that the entire movement can be performed at max effort instead of one joint angle being the point of maximal stimulus (e.g., the sticking point or reversal on a bench press). The resultant effect is more positive tissue and metabolic stress in maybe a tenth of the time.

This is what they have coined “Nemesis” mode, and it is the main mode being promoted. Although isotonic is my favorite mode, I have to say Nemesis is quite helpful for being able to consolidate a lot of maximal strength work into less time due to the added intensity. Ratcheting up the intensity means I can turn down the volume a bit in this area, which enables more time for other adaptations, be it mobility, agility, or speed development.

I also appreciate being able to load athletes in-season in less time to keep them strong, resilient, and durable while avoiding overtraining. That wasn’t always easy before with time demands.

An underrated benefit here is that filling these strength deficits with Speede—specifically having less volume—means fewer potential negative adaptations, says @coopwiretap. Share on X

Lastly, an underrated benefit here is that filling these strength deficits with Speede—specifically having less volume—means fewer potential negative adaptations. Those familiar with some biomechanics concepts ala PRI (Postural Restoration Institute) are probably hip to the idea that too much maximal strength work in certain positions may lead to unfavorably repositioning a joint (e.g., the excess extension and hip external rotation you see in the posture and gait of many powerlifters).

Although it’s early, my experience so far has been that Speede has helped me capture the benefits of maximal strength work without some of the consequences—or getting taxed 80 cents on the dollar—that can potentially come from excess time spent here (S.A.I.D. principle). All of that is to say there may be something to more time spent doing more exercises that are kinematically (biomechanically) relevant and less time spent developing qualities that may be needed (but not always biomechanically transferrable) ala the work of Frans Bosch and Thomas Myers.

3. Eccentric-Only Mode

This essentially serves as Speede’s eccentric overload mode. Because we can tolerate more load on the negative portion of the movement, some may want to overload this action (as is commonly seen in rehab settings). This can be particularly useful because research shows we’re at least 40% stronger (if not far more) in the eccentric portion of movements.

Most of you reading this will already be familiar with eccentric overload work and understand how to program this into your own unique system. For me, this is the mode (and training theory on the whole) that needs a lot of context. I use it to overload certain joint angles for added neuromuscular and neuromyofascial recruitment in a rehab and/or prevention context. It’s definitely ultra-helpful for any potential hypertrophy needs, too.

I tend to use it a lot for accessory isolation work (e.g., a hamstring curl) and non-specific work. When I’m loading movements that look similar to ones I’m going to see in sport (e.g., a squat), I tend to have my guys intentionally yield into the movement ala Jay Schroeder or PRI theories versus fight going into it. However, that goes for any type of eccentric-only training and is not exclusive to Speede. I love and use the mode, but I wanted to throw out the context that I may program eccentric work differently than your average coach.

I’ve found it to be super helpful for rehab and the reconditioning phase of training. I think this may very well be a favorite of most coaches, and being able to overload the eccentric portion of the movement without traditional spotting is very helpful in group training settings (the same goes for spotting with isokinetic mode).

4. Recovery Mode

Although this may help guide an individual athlete away from a trainer, at the same time, many coaches could still find it fruitful. Many coaches (me included) like to do specific things when it comes to decompression, movement prep, sensory preparation, and dynamic warm-ups.

I still do these things that don’t include the machine, but I can say having high-level sensory preparation (vestibular system) and being able to lead athletes through a gentle stimulus that helps them find tensegrity (optimal length/tension relationships) in various positions/ranges of motion is very useful. For the former, think of certain ocular drills; for the latter, think of biasing certain tissues in certain positions athletes may need to absorb and convert force in.

This mode provides a gentle stimulus that helps athletes do something close to PNF/FRC (proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation/functional range conditioning) concepts that combine mobility with some level of tension for effectiveness. I think if you’re coaching in a group format, being able to direct athletes to the machine for both some aspects of dynamic warm-up and/or offloading can better help you manage athletes that may need more cueing and attention for safety and effectiveness.

Notable Features

I have a particular way I coach (as do we all), so I’m going to do my best to highlight both a general overview and how I program the machine in my own system. This is because I understand that not everyone may coach the way I do, and I want to be inclusive of other training systems, uses, etc.

Excellent Variability for Exercise Options

Because of the adjustable angles of resistance, you can perform movements dominant in both vertical and horizontal planes of motion. Are standard-issue squats, deadlifts, or bicep curls more your thing? Speede can do it. Maybe you’re more into movements like front foot elevated split squats, horizontal pressing, cable chops, and beyond? Problem solved.

The wide variety of accessories they have and plan to add—such as handles, barbells, a trap bar, and much more—means we’re likely never to get bored of the same old movements, says @coopwiretap. Share on X

One thing that impressed me about Speede was the company’s commitment to versatility across the board, and exercise selection is an extension of that. The wide variety of accessories they have and plan to add—such as handles, barbells, a trap bar, and much more—means we’re likely never to get bored of the same old movements.

For use cases, cost-effectiveness, and space efficiency, I appreciate the exercise versatility.

Convenience Factor and Small Footprint

As I mentioned above, Speede has a relatively small footprint similar to that of a standard cable or a Tonal-type machine (much smaller than a squat rack). Athletes looking to build out home setups away from teams in the off-season should absolutely give Speede a look for this reason. As a professional with a facility, I believe it’s also highly attractive from the standpoint of being able to consolidate a few things into one. I don’t have to have many isolated, selectorized equipment, cable machines, or squat racks.

If you’re a personal trainer looking to adequately serve your clients while lean-scaling your business from a space perspective—I can see it being great for that. The same goes for some facilities and group settings looking to have multiple people work on one piece of equipment. Thanks to the customized resistance aspect, group training is even more efficient. The adaptable resistance and the personalized profiles saved in the cloud mean that various physical fitness levels (e.g., a healthy athlete and an injured one) can work out together without having to re-rack a ton of weight.

Personalization and Data Tracking

Speede’s proprietary software allows users to track a lot of metrics, including strength output, power development, velocity (for VBT needs), time under tension/duration of mechanical stress to the tissues, and other similar KPIs. This is something their engineering team has gone above and beyond with, guiding their process with feedback from practitioners and coaches like us. I can appreciate this because it essentially means that professionals in the trenches are guiding these metrics, so they’re meaningful.

Speede’s engineering team has gone above and beyond with its metric-tracking software, guiding their process with feedback from practitioners and coaches like us, says @coopwiretap. Share on X

I think I can speak for most of us in that this is refreshingly different from most fitness data out there. Because most performance data these days tends to be white noise coming from tech people trying to disrupt training without understanding it, this is a positive in my book. I’m used to having to talk people out of most wearables and similar things that result in majoring in the minors and/or simply aren’t accurate. Users’ progress is stored for in-person or remote head-to-head tracking for fun, ensuring a team is on track when away from the team staff and simply allowing your athletes to be more motivated by seeing their progress over time.

GTS Guided Training System 

Speaking of the software capabilities, Speede also offers built-in training guidance for safety, form instruction, and results. Speede has a force plate-lite technology that tells users if their center of mass is too offset. This also couples with motion capture technology so users can adjust their form in real time. Although this is probably most helpful for gen pop clients, I think it can be beneficial for coaches, too. From a professional perspective, this will also empower me to program for my remote clients, eventually, as Speede gains wider adoption.

Benefits, Considerations, and How I Personally Program Speede

Pros and cons aren’t really the right words, so I went with benefits and considerations. After all, what may be a no-brainer for some may simply not be the right tool in the shed for others. That’s how I’ve come to view most equipment…context is key. It’s all about what you need out of something, the situational constraints (e.g., space, finances), and how well those align with what value a tool can provide.

This is more for athletes investing in one for home use, but the first consideration would be having the space for it. Although Speede is much smaller than your average squat rack and similar in size to a cable or Bowflex machine, you’ll still need to find a little room. That said, its flat platform and stealth design mean you can easily add it to your average room without taking up as much of a footprint as other things. This goes double when you compare its versatility and what you get out of it.

Speede’s flat platform and stealth design mean you can easily add it to your average room without taking up as much of a footprint as other things, says @coopwiretap. Share on X

From a professional standpoint, this becomes less of an issue for almost every situation I can think of, as any gym space should be able to house one. As I mentioned before, you’ll be able to consolidate at least a handful of equipment pieces, if not more, into what Speede brings. I can see athletic training facilities opting for fewer squat racks, being able to mostly drop air resistance cable machines, and reducing the amount of selectorized equipment noticeably. This should offer nice cost savings in addition to the space consolidation.

On the financial side, Speede has done a great job of making this technology affordable for everyone. Priced at around one-fifth the cost of competitors on the market (who generally only have one or two of the multiple modes and less exercise variability), this is very affordable for your average gym, training facility, school, and professional team—and that’s even before factoring in the above ability to consolidate other pieces of equipment.

It’s also worth noting that there are other pieces of adaptable resistance isokinetic machines on the market that cost upward of $30,000 to $60,000, with ongoing fees for a fraction of the features. As someone who’s vetted this space quite a bit, Speede’s relative price stacks up quite well.

Still, it DOES cost more than your average rack setup (though less than some) or Bowflex, cable, or Tonal machine. I looked at it as an investment for the long run and a value-add for the ability to better serve my clients. Being able to sell off a few pieces of equipment that became unnecessary after picking this up also helped me pay off most of the machine.

General overview aside, programming Speede into my system, I personally get the most out of the following:

• Isokinetic mode enables me to microdose my athletes in-season.
• Adaptable resistance with isokinetic/eccentric mode auto-adjusts to where my rehabbing athletes’ current levels are—this means I can get them safer, more targeted strength progressions.
• Isotonic mode takes the place of your average cable and/or pneumatic resistance work. We do a ton of cable work, so as I mentioned before, I’m using isotonic mode more than anything else.
• Isokinetic mode helps me consolidate maximal strength work/filling some “strength deficits” so athletes have more time to recover and/or spend on other adaptations we’re chasing.
• The progress tracking is quite handy.
• Motor unit recruitment and strength/power/tissue recruitment with isokinetic mode.
• Targeting isolated muscle groups/consolidating some selectorized equipment.

There you have it. That’s how I use Speede and the benefits I get the most out of in my own practice. You may have other use cases or get more out of other aspects.

The Team

I mentioned the team before, and I personally feel that’s important. An Omegawave review by Coach Drew Cooper really highlighted who was behind the tech, and that always stuck with me…if they’re trying to solve a coach’s problems, they should have some folks who still coach in the trenches on board.

I can say the team behind Speede is what really drew me to reach out to get involved in some capacity. I think I can speak for most coaches when I say that we’re used to techies trying to cash in on fitness and “disrupt” what we do while not understanding it.

From day one, they’ve kept their ears open and relied on input from trainers, rehab professionals, athletes, fitness enthusiasts, researchers, and coaches to drive everything., says @coopwiretap. Share on X

Speede is the exact opposite. From day one, they’ve kept their ears open and relied on input from trainers, rehab professionals, athletes, fitness enthusiasts, researchers, and coaches to drive everything. This includes price point, features, versatility, data tracking, and user experience.

I feel this is the fundamental difference between companies that make quality equipment that over-delivers on serving its purpose (such as Keiser and Omegawave) and your typical fly-by-night outsider trying to “disrupt” the fitness industry.

**Disclaimer & Relationship Disclosure: I have reached out to Speede to become involved with the team in some capacity. That said, you don’t have to rely on my testimony—I highly encourage everyone to simply try a free Speede demo for themselves and experience the benefits firsthand.

**Please note that this review was conducted with prototype technology that *may* look or function differently than what you see here. That said, any potential differences would be around the edges vs. wholesale.**

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 Titan Sports System defines GPS load as “a scoring value accounting for the intensity and duration of effort based on GPS readings. The score is weighted with an exponentially increasing coefficient.” In the simplest terms, this differentiates the level of intensity of each yard by assigning greater weight to those yards at higher speeds. Those yards are then examined within the time they took place, giving us a look at the actual density of the yardage. For instance, 3,000 yards with 2,500 less than 6 m/s and 500 greater than 6 m/s will score lower than 3,000 yards with 1,500 below 6 m/s and 1,500 above.

This metric digs deeper than simple volume into what is happening with our high school football athletes. For reference, you will generally see a much greater GPS load from a receiver or defensive back than any other position. This is due in large part to the percentage of yards they cover at high velocity and the distance they cover at those speeds being higher than others because of the tactical and technical roles they play within the sport.

Initially, I tracked both total and high-speed (80%+) volume—this is an effective and valuable way to prepare. GPS load brings total intensity over time into one data point. Volume is still something to pay attention to, as we have had athletes accumulate as much as 14 miles of volume in a summer passing competition over the span of 5–6 hours. That type of number, even at walking speed, can still be a factor. Load gives us a more accurate picture of the athletes’ actual activity levels.

GPS load brings total intensity over time into one data point…Load gives us a more accurate picture of the athletes’ actual activity levels, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

Here, in part 2 of my article series on using GPS to prepare high school football players, I’ll look to expand on some of the basic procedures we use with GPS. In the first installment, I discussed the dilemma facing coaches in accounting for the highly variable training gap of the athletes once the voluntary off-season ends and mandatory practices begin. How can we use GPS as a guide to ensure our athletes have prepared for the workloads they face while not pushing them past the point of meeting those demands?

In part 1, I focused on using individual and positional volume as a place to begin ensuring optimal work capacity preparations. Now, I will dive into using GPS load to increase programming precision by bringing intensity and time into the equation. Using this metric has allowed us to become even more precise in preparing our athletes for the demands of not just playing but preparing for sport.

GPS Player Load

The charts below give a snapshot of how total volume and GPS load do not always correlate directly based on the athlete. The chart on the left shows the total practice volume over 2.0 m/s in a session. The chart on the right represents the GPS load with athletes in the same order. This is particularly helpful for athletes who play on both sides of the ball. One hundred yards walking on the sideline for a one-way player is different from that yardage for a player who plays both sides.

Another factor is how much a player on the sideline may cover in yardage doing things like walking to get water while a two-way player is on the field. The volume may be similar, or even more, but the intensity is much different. In both of the charts above, the top athlete is a two-way player. The player with the second-highest load (83.4 to 84.3) is, in fact, the seventh player in total volume. The load information adds depth to the process of using the data to guide us. It shows how much work an athlete has done in a session and allows us to compare that to the work levels of previous sessions.

We use GPS load not just to help guide our day-to-day sessions but also to ensure our loads do not have a great variance week to week. If they do? We need to account for that outside of sport. Our weekly pattern that has developed over the past four years for each day’s average player load is below.

The trick for me, as a non-sport coach, is that I don’t have a direct influence on actual practice intensity. This is not a designated high-low plan. Our data is organically developed based on the coaching staff’s typical practice plan.

It is my task to use the data to educate our coaches on the impacts of day-to-day intensity on our team’s recovery and ability to produce maximum outputs of speed, acceleration, and deceleration on game night. The goal is consistent workloads avoiding peaks and valleys that have been recognized to increase injury potential. This is why GPS is so important! If I assumed (guess) that the above schedule is how our team intensity is, I’d be wrong many times. Instead, I look at the data and am able to adjust our non-practice workloads.

For the skeptics who believe GPS will always slant toward ‘less work,’ that’s definitely not the case. Less or more isn’t the goal; focusing on optimal loads is, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

For the skeptics that believe GPS will always slant toward “less work,” I want to add that is definitely not the case. This process allows me to suggest adjustments to our staff for the next practice to fill the need or offset higher-than-expected load levels. Less or more isn’t the goal; focusing on optimal loads is. My suggestions have ranged from four to six 20-yard sprints (acceleration), to asking the defensive staff to add a 5-yard burst followed by a full-speed 180-degree wide base crossover (high-speed deceleration), to running fewer deep routes in drills and pass skell. Once you have your process, the adjustments become clear.

Above is an example of practice in camp with a GPS load much higher than a typical mid-week session for most players (below).

We use the data we collect not only to guide this acute weekly schedule but to ensure the chronic loads do not drop or increase significantly from week to week. For example, we want the upcoming Monday not to be a significant drop-off from the previous Monday; if it is, then we need to take a deeper dive into the high-speed distance, accelerations, and decelerations to determine precisely what buckets were shorted. We then can use time outside of sport to fill those needs.

Each day of the week varies due to the tactical and technical aspects of the practice schedule. As strength and conditioning coaches, this is where we must lean on data collection from previous seasons to help guide our process. This is also where trust and a relationship with your football staff play a vital role. I never suggest wholesale changes to practice—that is unrealistic and unsustainable, as the sport coach needs to be the driver of that process. Our role is to look at past data, get a picture of the demands, and use this to make subtle suggestions that can be easily instituted.

What I found in the three-year historical averages for our situation was:

Looking at actual game demands, we see our peaks being in the low 200s and our average being in the 150 range. Since the evidence-based Acute:Chronic Workload Ratio suggests that the further past 1.5x load an athlete goes, the increased risk of injury,¹ I decided to set my initial goals for the week at 225–300 total. From there, we have been using a combination of sprint speeds, peak acceleration, and “coach’s eye” to adjust as the situation demands. We found our “sweet spot” to be in the 200–260 range.

One thing you must consider when using GPS to guide practice adjustments is that each team, each coaching staff, and each season will present a unique situation, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

One thing you must consider when using GPS to guide practice adjustments is that each team, each coaching staff, and each season will present a unique situation. You and the football staff must develop your own process based on those and many other factors. You must collect historical data from your team’s plans and tweak them within the parameters your coaches are comfortable with.

In my ideal situation, Monday is always a bit of a gamble because kids don’t really rest as much as we hope on the weekend. I’d keep this as a moderate day. Tuesday would be the heaviest load. Wednesday would be our adjustment day, and Thursday would be our lighter day.

Based on our staff plan, the following is the reality that makes the most sense for us as of the 2022 season.

Here is an example of our last three weeks, with black being the optimal load, red higher than scheduled, and blue lower than expected:

As we look over the chart, we can see a perfect example of day-to-day adjustments in week 1. Monday was one of those days that football teams sometimes have—it was longer and had much more high-speed movements. Reviewing practice with our head coach showed that our team and group sessions were extended by multiple plays each. There was also an extended special team session.

Those are all factors that are out of our control. Our job in this situation isn’t to attempt to change the way our sports coaches coach. Instead, we need to examine the results and do our best to adjust going forward in a way that culminates in our goals being successfully met.

I control Tuesday in class—this gives me a great deal of influence on our actual workload. We used Tuesday as a lighter day in our class “fill the bucket” session and in practice. However, as can happen, it ended up being a little too low (although the in-class GPS load is not calculated, which is one unavoidable hole in our process that I will discuss later in this article). Wednesday was back up a little, as the needed adjustment was made, and Thursday was higher than normal but not out of the norm by much.

Week 2 was a more typical workload. Week 3? We had a heat-related shorter practice. What isn’t reflected? We adjusted our Tuesday “fill the bucket session” to be less “max velo” centered and instead did higher volume high-speed acceleration and deceleration drills, including small-sided games. Because of the turnaround time for syncing units and washing vests, Tuesday’s class was educated guessing. We looked at what was in need and attacked it as optimally as possible. Wednesday was once again adjusted to offset a need. Thursday was typical, and Friday was a low-workload game.

The GPS data from that particular game showed less than normal max velo or high-speed acceleration. It was a defensive shutout, so very little was needed. That will factor into what we do the following week on Tuesday as well. We let the data guide the programming. Our goals for the next week? Hope for a typical Monday and adjust as needed each day to ensure we don’t have any significant increase or decrease in workload.

I cannot emphasize enough how important trust is between you and the football staff for this process to be effective. I had to go to our head coach and explain in depth why any type of running post-practice needed to be dealt with in a targeted way. If the data says we have filled our need for sprint yardage, running ten 40-yard dashes is counterproductive.

He had the combination of trust and a growth mindset to look at what I was showing him and see great value in it. If we have a deficiency in high-speed deceleration, and I ask our defensive staff to coach a hard, full-speed change of direction in drills, I must know they trust me enough to take that recommendation. Trust and willingness to comply and make these adjustments is the ONLY reason I spend the time and effort on GPS.

Using GPS load is just one of many ways to help your coaches and athletes be shielded through exposure to the demands of their sport, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

Using GPS load is just one of many ways to help your coaches and athletes be shielded through exposure to the demands of their sport. It is part of my process, but it may or may not fit your situation or needs. That is not right or wrong—it’s perspective-based problem-solving. I encourage you to jump into the GPS pool and begin collecting data. Your process, whether the same as mine or not, will begin to develop.

This time we added depth to our process by moving from volume to load. In future installments, I will continue to layer our process by covering how we use acute:chronic work ratio to help individualize load, high speed (90%+ of max velocity) sprint data, and high-speed acceleration and deceleration as guides to fill the buckets that practice may not always succeed in doing. We will continue to explore how GPS allows us to make these decisions without a high level of guesswork and as optimally as possible.

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

References

1. White, Ryan. “Acute:Chronic Workload Ratio – Science for Sport.” Science for Sport, 26 Nov. 2017.

Everyone wants to be faster. We dedicate hours upon hours to reading and researching ways to improve technique, power output, and the effectiveness of our training modalities. And while we all admit the importance of nutrition and its application to speed and athletic performance, we spend little time on this area that could give us a level up on our competition.

Enter the Fueling Speed Hierarchy, nutritional items with a direct application to speed. Nutritional strategies have a range of important benefits when we look at optimizing speed and power output, whether providing fuel for our energy systems and the brain and central nervous system, assisting with muscle protein synthesis, promoting optimal body composition, aiding in muscular contraction and nerve conduction, or playing a role in injury prevention.

This article will discuss the five nutritional practices I believe have the biggest impact on helping athletes improve their strength, power, and explosiveness in ways that translate to increases in speed:

1. Ensure sufficient carbohydrate intake. This fuels our most utilized energy systems and provides the substrate used more directly in speed and explosiveness as the preferred fuel for the brain and central nervous system.
2. Plan adequate protein intake, timing, and dosages. Doing so will optimize muscle protein synthesis and allow for muscular adaptations to training.
3. Maintain euhydration and fluid/electrolyte balance. This plays a crucial role in muscular contraction, body temperature regulation, and injury prevention.
4. Consume an adequate intake of micronutrients (vitamins and minerals). The benefits of this include helping regulate muscle and nerve contraction and providing antioxidants.
5. Supplement as needed with vitamins, minerals, and compounds. Finding the right supplements can improve power and explosiveness by reducing perceptions of fatigue, providing energy system fuel, and preventing acid-base disturbances.

It is important to note that while nutritional interventions for a singular sprint are poorly represented in research, the training required for that single race—including lifting, plyometrics, speed drills, and repeat sprint training—is impacted immensely by nutrition strategies. We also know that speed and power have commonalities across many sports that include intermittent maximal efforts, including an explosive first step in volleyball, a breakaway in soccer, stealing a base in baseball, and driving to the hoop in basketball.

While nutritional interventions for a singular sprint are poorly represented in research, the training required for that single race is impacted immensely by nutrition strategies, says @lindsey_rd. Share on X

Knowing the causes of central (CNS) and peripheral (muscular) fatigue in these maximal, short-duration training and competition scenarios allows us to better identify the nutritional strategies that can help support optimal speed and power output.

Muscularly, multiple energy systems will be utilized during an intermittent sport: primarily, the ATP-CP for individual explosive outputs and repetitive efforts with sufficient recovery and anaerobic glycolysis for repetitive efforts with incomplete and insufficient recovery (obviously along with aerobic for long competitions and active recovery during low-intensity breaks in the action). However, fueling is not just about energy systems.

For speed, the central nervous system also needs the correct nutrient substrates due to the highly coordinated, neurologically demanding, and focused nature required for optimal expression. The goals of performance nutrition interventions as they pertain to speed then become providing the most economical energy system fuel that will meet the demands of the sport (or event) and ensuring there are adequate substrates available to fuel optimal performance.

Below, we will discuss in greater detail each of the five nutritional strategies I have identified to positively impact speed and power development and performance.

Ensure Sufficient Carbohydrate Intake (Yes, Power Athletes, You Need Them Too!)

When it comes to performance nutrition, carbohydrates are king. They are extremely pertinent to speed and often overlooked in favor of viewing fuel as simply muscular energy, but the fact is that the brain and CNS prefer to run on glucose, and carbohydrates play a significant role in neurotransmission and cerebral metabolism. Based on this fact alone, we can see where they would play a substantial role in sprint performance and speed development; on top of that, they are the primary fuel for our anaerobic energy system while also being the most efficient and economical substrate available.

Carbohydrate depletion leads to fatigue. But did you know this depletion can also lead to reductions in sport-specific skills, decreased work rates, and impaired concentration, asks @lindsey_rd. Share on X

Carbohydrate depletion leads to fatigue, which would typically be thought of as occurring in a longer duration sprint through the reduction of glycolysis. But did you know that this depletion can also lead to reductions in sport-specific skills, decreased work rates, and impaired concentration? These are all factors that need to be locked in for improvement in a refined and complex motor skill such as sprinting. In fact, at the neurological level, a reduction in available glucose inhibits CNS and neuromuscular coordination and efficiency, potentially leading to decrements in motor skills and increased perception of fatigue!

Video 1. Speed training.

So how do we address this? For a speed athlete, even though carbohydrate fueling strategies are traditionally most discussed in the endurance population, starting a training session or competition with sufficient muscle glycogen levels and using pre/intra fueling strategies to support glucose availability and glycogen sparing is incredibly important.

We know that our storage capacity for glycogen is approximately 400 grams in the muscle and 100 grams in the liver. Depletion of these stores, as seen in high-volume training sessions, in multiple daily sessions, or with inadequate refueling/fueling, can not only contribute to the fatigue mentioned above but has also been connected to an increased risk of injury. Carbohydrates also help spare protein instead of it being oxidized, allowing it to be used for muscle protein synthesis, which is vital for speed training adaptations (discussed in more detail below).

While body composition is influenced by multiple factors, carbohydrate and protein intake (discussed in the next section) can be manipulated within the total energy intake to support these goals. It is important to note that body composition and body weight alone are not accurate predictors of performance, and the goal of hypertrophy work within a speed development program is to optimize, not maximize, to meet the demands of the sport/event.

When looking to gain fat-free mass in a speed athlete, the objective should be to optimize the power-to-strength ratio as opposed to gaining absolute strength and size. When changes in body composition are warranted and could help the athlete optimize performance, they should be done in the off-season or early pre-season to avoid any possible decrements to performance. We will discuss body composition further in the next section.

Carbohydrate needs vary based on body size, lean mass, and sport and training demands, but current recommendations support athletes consuming between 4 and 12 grams per kilogram of body weight daily to help optimize performance. Speed athletes I have worked with tend to perform best in the 5–8 g/kg BW range, adjusted up or down based on individual needs. Within these daily needs to support glycogen storage levels, we can look at specific nutrient timing to best support training, competition, and recovery.

In the pre-training window, athletes should seek to consume 1–4 grams of carbohydrates per kilogram of body weight one to four hours pre-training. As this meal gets closer to our training/competition, we want to avoid too much fat or fiber, which could cause GI distress during exercise. In the window directly pre-training (15–30 minutes out), an easily digested, simple carbohydrate item can provide a source of glucose and aid in glycogen sparing, leaving that fuel for anaerobic glycolysis (and preventing protein oxidation for optimal MPS).

In the post-training window, we aim to replenish glycogen stores used during training or competition. Athletes should seek to consume 1–1.2 g/kg/hour for the first 4–6 hours post-training. Continual feeding past the meal directly post-training is important to optimize glycogen levels, as glycogen resynthesis rates are shown to be ~5% an hour.

The role of carbohydrates intra-training as they pertain to speed is not limited solely to glycogen sparing. Research now supports carbohydrates used as a “mouth rinse,” playing a role in counteracting signals that can contribute to central (CNS) fatigue. Think of them as “taking off the governor” (motor drive) and positively modifying the motor unit output.

Research now supports carbohydrates used as a ‘mouth rinse,’ playing a role in counteracting signals that can contribute to central (CNS) fatigue, says @lindsey_rd. Share on X

This has been demonstrated mostly in 30- to 60-minute activities (e.g., intermittent sports, speed training) and is thought to be related to receptors that are present in the mouth and brain responding to carbohydrates (seen with both glucose and maltodextrin [maltose and dextrose] mixtures), which activate reward centers in the CNS and reduce perceptions of fatigue, thereby increasing work rates. Implementation of the mouth rinses could be as simple as sipping and spitting a sports beverage that is 5–8% carbohydrate during training/competition.

Plan Adequate Protein Intake, Timing, and Dosages

If carbohydrates are the king of performance nutrition, protein is the queen. Protein serves as a substrate but also a trigger for the synthesis of contractile proteins through a process known as muscle protein synthesis (MPS). This process is critical in creating the training adaptations we are looking for in speed development training, and protein itself can serve as a trigger for those metabolic adaptations we seek.

Like carbohydrates (and dietary fats), protein has a direct effect on body composition—not only through its contribution to total energy intake but also in the maintenance of lean body mass on a hypocaloric diet. If body composition changes are warranted to optimize performance (remember, body comp and body weight do not accurately predict performance), keeping protein levels higher can help maintain lean mass while in a caloric deficit to see body fat reductions. Recommendations for protein intake when reducing total calories to make body composition changes range from 2.3–2.4 grams/kg BW/day. Lean mass maintenance has been shown to be optimized when athletes lose no more than 1% of their body mass weekly.

Daily protein intake for athletes is currently set at 1.2–2.0 g/kg BW/day. Most literature supports an ideal range of 1.5–1.7 grams/kg BW for speed athletes, but this may increase with the demands of the sport (e.g., in contact sports).

Protein timing throughout the day is important to optimize MPS. The majority of protein intake in regard to training is focused in the post-window. However, pre-training protein consumption can aid in satiety to lower the physiological hunger experienced during training and competition. During training, protein consumption can help spare amino acids from being oxidized, leaving them available for MPS.

Post-training, we are looking to trigger metabolic adaptations within the muscle, which has been shown to happen with highly biologically available proteins consumed 0–2 hours post-training containing 10+ grams of essential amino acids. The total protein content of this feeding should be around .25–.3 g/kg BW post-training. It is recommended that this dose is then repeated about every 3–5 hours throughout the day to optimize MPS and recovery. Intakes of more than 40 grams of protein have not been shown to further improve MPS but may be warranted for larger athletes, individuals on a hypocaloric diet, or those with higher total daily protein needs. A good goal for most athletes is to consume doses of 20–40 grams of protein every 3–4 hours while awake to optimize MPS and hit total daily protein intake needs.

A good goal for most athletes is to consume doses of 20–40 grams of protein every 3–4 hours while awake to optimize muscle protein synthesis and hit total daily protein intake needs. Share on X

Protein intake in the post-training window can also lower carbohydrate needs to achieve the same glycogen resynthesis. Research supports that an intake of .8 grams of carbohydrate/kg BW/hour combined with .4 grams of protein/kg/hour achieves similar glycogen resynthesis as a consumption of 1.2 grams/kg/hour of carbohydrate. This is yet another reason to consume protein in the post-training window and throughout the day, especially for an athlete who struggles to meet higher carbohydrate needs post-training.

Maintain Euhydration and Fluid/Electrolyte Balance

Hydration has multiple impacts on athletic performance, including the role of electrolytes in muscular contraction, injury prevention, and maintenance of electrolyte balance in the body. Pre-exercise hypohydration can increase muscle strength and power, and too great of a loss of fluids and electrolytes can impair performance. We start to see a decrease in high-intensity activities at a loss of 3%–5% of total body weight during training and competition. At these levels, we can begin to see alterations to CNS and metabolic function due to hypovolemia and increased glycogen use leaving less fuel for glycolysis.

To prevent this great of a loss, speed athletes should set a goal of starting their training or competition in a euhydrated state and losing no more than 2%–3% of their body weight during exercise. The focus post-training should then be on rehydrating and replacing lost fluids and electrolytes.

Current recommendations for pre-exercise hydration include consumption of 5–10mL/kg BW 2–4 hours prior to training/competition. Sweat rates and concentrations vary greatly between athletes and in different weather/altitude conditions. Sweat losses per hour can range from .3–2.5 L/hour. We can calculate an athlete’s specific fluid loss by taking their pre-training weight and subtracting their post-training weight, adding fluids consumed during training, subtracting urine output during that time, and dividing by the duration of training. For every kilogram lost during training, an athlete needs about 1–1.5 liters of fluids for rehydration.

The general recommendation is to consume .4–.8 liters an hour during training/competition for intermittent sports to avoid hypohydration. Athletes with high sweat rates (>1.2 L/h), those identified as “salty sweaters” (usually you will see white residue on the skin or jersey, or the sweat will have a very salty taste), very hot/humid temperatures, and those training more than two hours will also need to replenish sodium in this window.

Sodium is the primary ion lost in sweat (~20–80 mmol/L) and should be the primary electrolyte in a hydration beverage. A sports drink with 5%–8% carbohydrate (higher can cause GI distress), 10–35 mmol/L sodium, and 3–5 mmol/L potassium (for the CNS) is currently recommended for sodium replenishment during training. (As mentioned above, this could also be used to provide glucose for glycogen sparing and as a mouth rinse.) Cold beverages may also help reduce core body temperature in hot weather training/competition.

Rehydration post-training should be the focus of a speed athlete, allowing them to begin their next training session/competition in a euhydrated state. An athlete’s goal should be to replenish with 125%–150% of the fluids lost during training (1–1.5 L/kg BW lost) and to replace sodium losses via the consumption of salty foods or an electrolyte replacement supplement (50–60 mmol/L sodium and 10–20 mmol/L potassium).

Rehydration post-training should be the focus of a speed athlete, allowing them to begin their next training session/competition in a euhydrated state, says @lindsey_rd. Share on X

The average sodium loss per liter of sweat is 1 gram or 1,000 milligrams (as mentioned above, this varies significantly between athletes). Replenishing these losses post-training and competition is vital to help the body retain the fluids consumed, restoring optimal plasma volume and levels of extracellular fluids. It is essential to be aware of an athlete’s rehydration rate and spread their intake over the 0–4 hour post-training period to avoid a rapid expansion of blood volume, which can cause a diuresis effect.

Consume Adequate Intake of Micronutrients

Any athlete should aim to prevent micronutrient deficiencies through a balanced intake that meets total energy, macro, and micronutrient needs. And while all micronutrients have an indirect role in supporting energy production—and thus performance—there are three we should be extra aware of as they pertain to muscular function and speed:

1. Calcium
2. Vitamin D
3. Iron

Calcium

Calcium aids in the regulation of muscular contraction and nerve conduction. As we know, calcium facilitates the myosin and actin interaction within the muscle cell. It is then, when calcium is pumped back into the sarcoplasmic reticulum, that the muscle relaxes. Most athletes who do not avoid dairy or use foods fortified with calcium will meet their daily intake needs of 1,500 mg/day (with 1,500–2,000 IUs of vitamin D as discussed below). Calcium is also an important mineral in bone health (along with vitamin D and phosphorus), which can help prevent bone injury. It is important to note that high levels of calcium in the blood can cause muscle weakness, and supplements should be used under the direction of a physician or dietitian.

Vitamin D

Vitamin D has a role in bone health (aiding in calcium and phosphorus absorption and playing a biomolecular role in mediating the metabolic functions of the muscle). Optimal vitamin D levels for athletes are >40 ng/ml. Athletes living above the 35th parallel, or those who train and compete indoors, are at the highest risk of deficiency. Supplementation may be warranted in amounts of 2,000–5,000 IUs daily as indicated by lab work.

Iron

We know iron deficiency, with or without anemia, reduces muscular function and work capacity, as maximal oxygen uptake will be limited. Elite athletes, especially females, can be at risk of developing iron deficiency. While this is most frequently seen in the endurance population, we must be aware of iron’s importance for all athletes. Intakes >18 mg/day for menstruating females and >8 mg/day for males are recommended, with heme iron (meat, poultry, seafood) being better absorbed than non-heme (nuts, whole grains, legumes, etc.).

It wouldn’t be a micronutrient conversation without discussing antioxidants—something that has a lot of steam in the sports nutrition space right now. We agree that exercise causes oxidative stress and that an athlete’s goal should be an antioxidant-rich diet (think fruit, vegetables, and healthy fats). Where opinions differ is on the use and benefit of antioxidant supplements like tart cherry juice.

I do not recommend that my athletes use these antioxidant supplements in the off-season or pre-season when our goal is adaptation, as these supplements could negatively influence it. Instead, they should be used during the season, potentially in the evening before competition or key training sessions.

Supplement as Needed with Vitamins, Minerals, and Compounds

The role of supplementation in positively impacting speed performance lies in providing energy system fuel, preventing acid-base disturbances, and reducing perceptions of fatigue. There are four supplements I lean on to help optimize sprint performance:

1. Creatine
2. Caffeine
3. Sodium bicarbonate
4. Beta-alanine

The sport/event would impact the use of these, but by understanding their mechanisms, we can best identify which athletes would benefit from their use.

There are four supplements I lean on to help optimize sprint performance: creatine, caffeine, sodium bicarbonate, and beta-alanine, says @lindsey_rd. Share on X

It’s important to remember that athletes must be careful with supplements and ensure their safety and purity before using them. Supplements should be third-party tested with effectiveness and dosages backed by research. A cost-benefit analysis should always be done before beginning a supplement, and tolerance should be tested outside of competition/key training sessions.

Creatine

Creatine is one of the most studied and safest supplements on the market and, in my opinion, the most impactful on performance. Creatine has been shown to have numerous benefits, but for the purposes of this article, we primarily see performance improvements in repeated bouts of high-intensity exercise with short recovery periods. Based on our earlier discussion of surrounding energy systems, we know phosphocreatine is the substrate used in the ATP-CP, our main energy system utilized in maximal sprints. Creatine phosphate provides a rapid source of phosphate to resynthesis ADP to ATP. Creatine has also been shown to enhance glycogen storage and muscle protein synthesis, which are both critical for optimal speed development and to buffer H+ ions created in anaerobic glycolysis.

On an omnivorous diet, most individuals will get between 1 and 2 grams of creatine daily (found in meat, fish, and eggs). Supplementation is then recommended to saturate muscular stores. Creatine monohydrate is highly bioavailable and is what I recommend to the athletes I work with. Creatine can be taken using a loading phase of 20–25 grams (.3 g/kg) per day split into four doses for 5–7 days or starting at a maintenance dose of 3–5 (.03 g/kg) grams per day taken for 4–12 weeks. After these phases, the levels of creatine stored in the muscle can be maintained with doses of 3–5 g/day (.03 g/kg).

It is important to note that a loading phase may be accompanied by a 2% increase in body weight (water, glycogen, intracellular concentrations of PC) and may not be recommended in speed-based training/sports. Creatine intake post-training with carbohydrates and protein is found to enhance creatine storage caused by increases in blood flow and the effect of insulin.

Caffeine

Ingestion of caffeine pre-training and exercise has been shown to reduce the perception of fatigue (given its role as an adenosine agonist), reduce pain perception, increase athletes’ alertness, and help enhance mood. Caffeine can also help with the release of calcium from the sarcoplasmic reticulum, which we discussed earlier.

Recommended caffeine ingestion pre-exercise is ~3–6 mg/kg body weight, taken 30–60 minutes pre-training/competition. Gums with caffeine content, which are increasing in popularity, are absorbed more quickly and could be taken closer to competition. The half-life of caffeine depends on genetic factors but ranges from 2.5–10 hours. We do not see performance benefits above 6 mg/kg body weight, and high intakes can be associated with adverse side effects; therefore, these are not recommended.

Sodium Bicarbonate

Sodium bicarbonate is a buffer helping to prevent acid-base disturbances, which occur from the accumulation of lactic acid and H+ ions via anaerobic glycolysis—we see this in sports that involve sprinting but are more continuous in nature (e.g., hockey) or alactic sports where the pace of the game results in recovery periods that are insufficient for the ATP-PC system to keep up (e.g., spread offense in football). Sodium bicarb helps enhance the muscle’s ability to dispose of those hydrogen ions, which can delay the onset of fatigue. This would be most beneficial in sports with repeated high-intensity sprints (1–7 minutes) and may not be beneficial in single, maximal sprint events.

Doses of 300–500 mg/kg body weight are recommended 60–180 minutes before training/competition with a carbohydrate meal and fluids. Gastrointestinal symptoms are a known side effect of sodium bicarbonate, and tolerance should be tested during non-key training sessions. Splitting the amount into smaller doses spread over the pre-training period may help.

Beta-Alanine

Beta-alanine is primarily found in type II muscle fibers, accounting for 10% of the ability to buffer hydrogen ions. This occurs through the increased synthesis of carnosine, which lowers the ph balance in the muscle by exchanging hydrogen ions for calcium within the muscle, leading to enhanced efficiency of contraction in coupling and excitation. We see the most ergogenic benefits from beta-alanine in 60–240 seconds of high-intensity training/competition, such as in the example scenarios in the previous paragraph.

When compared to sodium bicarb, beta-alanine provides more chronic muscular adaptations. The goal of supplementation is to increase the storage of carnosine by 30%–50% in the muscle, which has been seen with 3–6 grams of beta-alanine taken daily over 4–10 weeks, then a maintenance dose of 1.2 g/day from there on. It is recommended to take beta-alanine with a carbohydrate/protein-rich meal at any time during the day. Parathesis is a known side effect of beta-alanine, but it can be reduced by dividing the daily dosage and spreading it throughout the day or using a slow-release capsule.

Creating Your Edge

While your competitors obsess over finding the latest and greatest training fad in speed development, get an advantage by making sure that the V8 engine you built during training has the right high-octane fuel to use all that horsepower. Using these strategies with the athletes I’ve worked with, I have seen increased abilities to perform repeated, max-effort sprints and explosive movements, improved recovery and muscular adaptations to training, and reduced perceptions of fatigue in training and competition. In my experience, dialing in nutrition, hydration, and supplementation also increases an athlete’s confidence in their ability to train and compete at a high intensity for a longer duration.

Dialing in nutrition, hydration, and supplementation also increases an athlete’s confidence in their ability to train and compete at a high intensity for a longer duration, says @lindsey_rd. Share on X

When looking at nutrition for speed development and competition, consider the Fueling Speed Hierarchy: carbohydrates, protein, hydration, micronutrients, and supplementation. Implement a few of these strategies into your training, and let those horses sing!

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

Thomas T, Erdman KA, and Burke LM. “Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Dietitians of Canada and the American College of Sports Medicine: Nutrition and Athletic Performance.” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2016;116(3):501–528.

Naderi A, de Oliveira EP, Ziegenfuss TN, and Willems MET. “Timing, optimal dose and intake duration of dietary supplements with evidence-based use in sports nutrition.” Journal of Exercise Nutrition & Biochemistry. 2016;20(4):1–12.

Maughan RJ (Ed.). (2014). Sports Nutrition : The Encyclopedia of Sports Medicine an IOC Medical Commission Publication: Vol. XIX. Wiley.

Burke L, Deakin V, and Minehan M. (2021, July 29). Clinical Sports Nutrition 6th Edition (6th ed.). McGraw Hill/Australia.