Blog

Intuition would probably tell you that athletes are faster when they race. Makes sense, right? It’s competition, they have motivation, it turns their brain off so they can just sprint. But my analytical brain wanted to know if that was actually true. We can scientifically answer that question with sport science and the scientific method, in addition to using our coaching intuition.

From a coaching standpoint, we are always trying to draw more effort out of our athletes to run harder and faster. However, as coaches coach more and athletes learn more, too many drills and cues can potentially slow down full-speed sprinting in training. Thus, it’s important to bridge the gap between training and games. But how do we replicate game speed (literally and figuratively) in training?

Sports are played in competition and sports are played fast. In training, although things need to be slowed down and emphasized to improve things like technique, we can’t forget about the true end goal. Racing serves a purpose to bring the technique and drill work full circle, create a fun and engaging training environment, and draw out some pretty fast times. But what is the effect of racing on sprint times? Effort might be up, engagement might be up, but does racing actually make athletes faster?

What is the effect of racing on sprint times? Effort might be up, engagement might be up, but does racing actually make athletes faster, asks @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Sport science is simply just applying the scientific method to getting better at sport. The scientific method is:

• Ask a question/create a hypothesis.
• Collect your data.
• Analyze the data.
• Figure out what the data means.
• Apply it to the real world.

That’s just what I did to answer my racing question, and I’m here to explain my process.

Methods

Although this is a personal and informal case study, it’s still important to get the highest quality data possible. As they say: garbage [data] in, garbage [data] out. Having gone through the entire process of starting, finishing, and publishing my thesis in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research not too long before doing this case study, my research brain kicked into gear. Here’s everything I did (especially things I did NOT do) to control for the confounding variables:

1. I kept my instructions and general words to a minimum. The instructions followed something like this: “We’re going to do four timed sprints: two are by yourself and two are racing against someone else. Walk back in between. I’ll tell you whether you’re going by yourself or racing when it’s your turn. If you’re racing but not being timed, you’ll run next to them but outside the timing lasers.”
2. I didn’t share my research question, hypothesis, or anything pertaining to my motive for the experiment. I didn’t want my athletes knowing that I was comparing and contrasting the two types of sprints to artificially draw out more effort during the race. One might be able to assume my intentions and guess the purpose based on my instructions, but at least it wasn’t my explicit words that influenced their motivation.
3. I didn’t coach in-between sprints, as I didn’t want a cue that they didn’t have the sprint prior to improve a sprint time.

4. I didn’t let any athlete see the sprint times. I didn’t want an athlete to become motivated by seeing a slower sprint time than what they are used to or expected. They tried peeking over my shoulder, but don’t worry, I had my head on a swivel.
5. I paired up my athletes with someone of a similar speed. If there was a big discrepancy in speed between athletes, this could’ve led to a lack of effort by the slower athlete. If there was not an athlete of similar speed, I gave the athlete not being timed during the race a head start if they were slower or made them start a few steps behind if they were faster. It’s not a perfect science, but that’s how I would handle a discrepancy in speed during a normal session.
6. Collecting this data over multiple training sessions with multiple groups of athletes, I alternated between one group doing their solo sprints first and the next group doing their races first. This minimized two things: the sprints at the beginning acting more like a warm-up and making the sprints at the end faster, and the sprints at the end being slower due to excessive fatigue from the prior sprints.
7. I was intentional about the rest periods. Although it wasn’t perfect, I did time the rest of the first person in each group to make sure they had at least two minutes of rest.

Athletes

Twenty-two athletes (n=22: 8 youth (9-11 years old), 11 middle school (12-14 years old), 3 high school (15-18 years old)) participated in speed and agility training sessions coached by me and had been attending for multiple weeks.

Data Collection and Analysis

After a full warm-up and a pre-data-collection sprint, they ran 5-15’s. A 5-15 is an acceleration test that’s 15 yards in length with the timing lasers set up on the 5- and 15-yard lines, respectively. Each athlete performed two 5-15’s solo (by themselves), instructed to run as fast as possible. Each athlete also performed two 5-15’s against another athlete. The races were started verbally by me saying “Ready, go!” The two sprints for each condition were averaged to give each athlete one time for solo and one time for racing. Solo times and racing times were then run in a paired samples T-test in jamovi.

Statistics Made Simple

A “p value” of < 0.001 means that less than 0.1% of the time, the difference between solo sprints and races happened by chance, or greater than 99.9% of the time the difference was actually there.

A “Cohen’s Effect Size” of 0.857 means that the magnitude or size of the difference between solo sprints and races was large (as opposed to medium or small).

The combination of these two stats means that the difference between the solo and the race (2.4% faster) wasn’t by chance, and it was a large difference.

Conclusions

Athletes sprint 2.4% faster when motivated by racing. Racing provides another tool in a coach’s toolbox to get faster training reps from their athletes. It’s a perfect option to help bridge the gap between controlled drills focused on technique and the true end goal of training being fast at game speed.

Racing is a perfect option to help bridge the gap between controlled drills focused on technique and the true end goal of training being fast at game speed, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Ultimately, because no one gets faster overnight, and we’re playing the long game in speed development, intentionally making athletes race will add up over time. Let’s say of your timed sprints during a training session, half of them are solo sprints and half of them are races. You just improved the output of 50% of your athlete’s training reps. Now add that up over the course of multiple months of training—that’d be a big difference in the stimulus given to your athletes. Sounds like an interesting and practical option to me.

Future Considerations

Although this makes sense in theory and the numbers make sense, there is some context and other factors worth mentioning.

• Races might not have same effect with older athletes who truly know how to sprint at max effort regardless of solo sprint or race. Considering 19 of my 22 athletes were ages 9 to 14, the numbers might’ve been a little different if there were more high school athletes.
• Technique sometimes decreased when they were just thinking about winning. Athletes sometimes tried reaching for the laser with their hand to “win” (those times weren’t recorded). It’s important to remind them to not let the finish line influence their technique.
• The number of athletes in a training session is an important factor. With larger groups, racing is a great option to keep more athletes moving and minimize the standing around. However, with smaller groups, rest times should be kept in mind since athletes sprint twice as frequently when racing.

Practical Applications

Races should be programmed during speed training for at least multiple reps at the end of a session. Although technique might slightly decrease, speed increases, and at the end of the day, that’s what we’re training for. A 50/50 approach of solo sprints to races might be effective in getting those quality, coaching-intensive reps in at the beginning then putting it all together at the end.

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

We all know the meet. Four to six big teams show up together on an April Saturday afternoon for a no-limit entry track meet. The last heat is scoring, but the rest are non-scoring. Some people find a way to kill the 45 minutes of 100m dashes with their meal ticket or find another coach to talk to about the problems of post-COVID-19 coaching. While I eat during the three heats of the 3200 and reapply sunscreen during the five heats of the 1600, I like to plant myself midfield right next to the track and watch the 18 heats.

As I watch athletes project their mass down the track in various sprinting styles, I wonder what can be done to make the 12.5 into an 11.5.

I know there are basic things that can be done to start making progress down that road. Stuff that I have written about in the past: crossover feet, heel strikes too far in front of the body. And we know how to deal with these issues with mini-hurdle runs and stiff-legged runs (Paytons or Prime Times). But if it is halfway through the season, and the drills aren’t catching, maybe we should start looking at some other things.

Posture is the first thing that jumps out from the early heats of the 100. Something that is so basic that we forget to deal with it in practice, drills, or even weightlifting. Why does posture fall apart? When the system is red-lined, like in a full sprint, there is a hierarchy to movement.

After breathing and keeping a horizon (and few other things), not falling is important. Safety is far more important than speed. The body quickly assesses what muscles can support the movement. It will shift so the muscles used are the ones that can support the body safely. They are not always the most powerful or efficient but the safest. If you don’t think this is true, watch how fast posture and gait change when someone injures themselves while sprinting.

In a full sprint, not falling is important. The body quickly assesses what muscles can support the movement and shifts so the muscles used are the ones that can support the body safely, says @korfist. Share on X

Once we are safe, we will move toward our target. This is why different body parts sometimes move toward the finish line. We are throwing as much as we can at where we are going. This is the reason when you blindfold someone and have them sprint, their form changes. Or when a happy 3-year-old is sprinting for fun and running fast, they always seem to have good form. Form becomes more natural when we eliminate intent.

There are three sections of the spine:

• Cervical
• Thoracic
• Lumbar

All three work together to counterbalance each other. The more an athlete can keep a neutral spine, the better the body performs. A good athlete can keep a neutral spine in various positions. A really good athlete has the ability to use their spine to create more power in their movement.

Where to Begin?

Let’s start in the middle. I know it is a strange place to start, but it is the place that controls both ends—really, it’s no different than an axle with two wheels on each side. The stiffer the middle, the more stable the ends will be. Same with a runner: if the middle is not stiff, both ends will compensate to get the body to the target.

In the case of the runner above, to gain extension, he loses pelvic control. As you can see, his right pelvis is over-rotating, which leaves his right leg long in the push. A telltale sign is that his right knee is behind his glute. This creates the problem of a longer time to swing the leg through, and the knee cannot get to the needed height for a good, fast tangential velocity.

Here are some effects of a wobbly middle. The first impact is the head.

If the body follows the head, the net propulsive forces are reduced with the 12-pound weight falling backward. If a coach asks the athlete to stand in place with the same head position, they will fall back.

Below are examples of what happens of what happens on the pelvic end of the axle.

Why Does This Happen? We Do Core Every Day!

You may be using the core exercises, but not properly. How often do you see people doing planks and dropping their head or pelvis? How often do you see side planks with the chin sticking out to balance or the spine not neutral in three planes?

Once you have a base of spinal control and strength, try challenging the spine with movement. Ask the spine to control itself in unpredictable scenarios, says @korfist. Share on X

When doing any of your running drills, how often do you focus on posture? Once you have a base of spinal control and strength, try challenging the spine with movement. Ask the spine to control itself in unpredictable scenarios. Enter the water bag. Try your drill and sprints with a water bag on your back. The spine has to constantly adjust.

For more advanced drills, I will be presenting at the University of Minnesota with Dan Fichter and Cal Dietz in July and will cover postural progression in detail. You can find sign-up details for the clinic here.

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 coaching process is defined as “the purposeful improvement of competition performance, achieved through a planned programme of preparation and competition.”¹  At its core, the coaching process is influenced by different sciences such as exercise physiology, anatomy, biomechanics, pedagogy or the science of teaching, psychology, testing and measurements, and statistics, to name a few.² However, it is truly a blend of science and art where the coach operates a complex, dynamic social activity that is goal-oriented with a focus on bringing about change.³

It is truly a blend of science and art where the coach operates a complex, dynamic social activity that is goal-oriented with a focus on bringing about change, says @xrperformance. Share on X

As an orchestrator, or Chef du Projet Performance, the coach coordinates the coaching process within set parameters to instigate, plan, organize, monitor, and respond to evolving circumstances in order to bring about improvement in the individual and collective performance.⁴ To help with the overall planning of this process, four main steps are usually included:

1. Planning
2. Intervention
3. Assessment
4. Adjustment

Planning

As a starting point, the coach uses existing professional knowledge about the physical, technical, tactical, and psychological demands of the sport to plan what needs to be done. Using the analogy of a road map, the coach has a destination in mind and an idea of how to get there but will most certainly need to manage a few uncertainties along the way.

For me, one example to support this analogy of the road map came about in the early 2021–2022 off-season with the men’s volleyball team at Université de Sherbrooke. As a coaching staff, we knew that we were working within a three-year plan, with all players but two having never played indoor volleyball at the university level. We were thus at the beginning of the journey, and our destination was clear; however, information about the upcoming university sports season was lacking at the time because of the pandemic, so long-term planning for games and playoffs was impossible.

To remediate the situation from an S&C perspective, I decided to think short-term and focus only on the summer off-season training. I remember telling one player that there were just too many unknowns to start planning the weeks of training during the competition phase. By limiting myself to the summer months, I was able to sequentially organize the training to take advantage of the phase potentiation associated with block periodization.

For example, the month of May was an introduction phase during which we focused much of our training on technique and used bodyweight movements to develop mobility and work capacity. This first training block was our foundation for the next three training blocks, which had a focus on preparation.

In June, our priority therefore shifted from teaching to training and saw the introduction of DB complexes, spectrum legs, and leg circuits to increase basic strength. During the month of July, it was possible for us to divide the group into two following some force plate testing, with one group focusing on eccentric strength and the other on maximum strength. Finally, August came around, and our focus was on developing muscular power through Olympic weightlifting, plyometrics, and maximal power training.

After these training blocks, it was possible to reevaluate the direction of the training, as new information about the upcoming season was now available. So, instead of planning for the whole season and hoping to peak for the playoffs, we reviewed our plan using a smaller time frame that allowed us to better manage uncertainties associated with COVID-19. After all, “training is a predictive process based on experience and scientific knowledge aimed at rationally, systematically, and sequentially organizing training tasks and the recovery process in order to reach performance goals at specific times.”⁵

Instead of planning for the whole season, we reviewed our plan using a smaller time frame that allowed us to better manage uncertainties associated with COVID-19, says @xrperformance. Share on X

At this moment, it is beneficial for the coach to perform a thorough analysis of the physiological and physical demands of the sport. Performance in different sports has evolved over the years and access to integrative technology such as GPS or accelerometers allows for a more refined analysis of the demands of a sport in general, and even the positional demands within it.

For example, recent investigations^6,7 in ice hockey used a local positioning system (as opposed to GPS technology because of the inability to connect to satellites in an indoor environment) or inertial measurement units⁸ to quantify and track the movement demands during games, whereas previous research mostly used heart rate to quantify the physiological demands of the game.

This necessity for a thorough needs analysis of the sport brings me back to the 2016 and 2017 seasons with the Canadian Football team at Université de Sherbrooke. We were fortunate at the time to be able to use a set of 10 GPS monitors during practices and games for a research project.⁹ During one game in 2016, I remember clearly watching some of the metrics being displayed live during a kickoff and thinking: Shoot, we have not trained special team players to sprint over long distances such as those displayed during a kickoff. Indeed, during summer training, most of our sprint distances were below 20-30 meters, while longer running distances were covered during our high-intensity interval training days.

Overall, having access to this information when planning future training can allow the coach to better prepare the athletes from an S&C perspective or replicate game situations that resemble what can happen in competition. In my case, I certainly made the necessary adjustments to better prepare the players to meet the demands of this specific aspect of the game.

Intervention and Assessment

During the training sessions of steps #2-3 of the coaching process, the coach actively teaches, provides instructions and feedback, manages desired behaviors, and asks questions to assess learning. At this point, as an orchestrator, the coach steers rather than controls the coaching process through unobtrusive monitoring and mutually agreed-upon agendas and by providing players with encouragement.

The steering—or monitoring—of the coaching process during a training session or over a longer period allows the coach to collect “decision-making information” from various sources.¹⁰ By looking for trends in training and performance, the coach actively seeks to answer the following questions:

• Are we getting positive training adaptations?
• How effective is the training program to meet the demands of the sport or the demands of the game model we want to implement?
• From a behavioral perspective, are we getting the desired behaviors from the players?

By implementing a monitoring process, either via objective measures like heart rate or force plate data or even subjective measures such as wellness questionnaires¹¹, the coach seeks to measure or know the individual response to different stressors (emotional, dietary, social, sleep, academic, sport). This data provides direction and supports the decision-making process. After all, it’s okay to deviate from the preplanned path if the data or information collected by the coach can drive future direction.

After all, it’s okay to deviate from the preplanned path if the data or information collected by the coach can drive future direction, says @xrperformance. Share on X

Adjustment

After collecting the “training information” available to them in the previous steps, how can coaches explore and question their decisions and experiences within the context of their own practice in the fourth step of adjustment? When triangulated with reflective tools and critical inquiry and critical thinking, this “training information” can be used by the coach to explore, question, and contextualize their professional practice with the objective to learn and become a more effective coach.¹²

The picture below shows how data, reflective practice, and being critical of oneself and one’s experiences can be used to support learning:

To give you an idea of this reflective process, during my PhD, Canadian football coaches at the university level were presented every week during the competition season with their players’ session RPE training loads as “training information.”¹³ This type of subjective monitoring of the training is quite easy to implement and can be adjusted to different sporting contexts.

In terms of reflective practice, coaches were asked to fill out post-training and post-competition reflective cards regularly. The post-training reflective cards required the coaches to briefly describe the training session, evaluate what went well and what went wrong, analyze why the session went the way it did, and provide an action plan for the next session. Meanwhile, the post-competition reflective cards required them to evaluate the team’s performance on a scale of 1-5 and provide some thoughts following the game.

During the weekly meetings, coaches were asked to comment on the results of the game and on the data they were presented with and how that data influenced their own decisions in terms of practice design. At the conclusion of this project, it was interesting to note that having access to the training load data and engaging in an emergent reflective process allowed coaches to contextualize their decisions and, at times, provide different scenarios in reaction to the data that was shared with them.

To encourage this exploration and questioning of their decisions and experiences, it is essential to promote a structure where reflective practice and experiential learning are supported and facilitated. The support of fellow coaches, mentors, critical friends, and even the organization as a whole is necessary to advance learning.

The support of fellow coaches, mentors, critical friends, and even the organization as a whole is necessary to advance learning, says @xrperformance. Share on X

The use of self-study methodology to improve and understand one’s practice thus becomes quite interesting, because we now know that learning is much more than the accumulation of knowledge.¹⁴ In fact, it is more about becoming an integrative thinker and changing one’s cognitive structure by creating a vast network between our knowledge, our ideas, and our feelings.¹⁵

Furthermore, the knowledge that is gathered by coaches over the years tends to be quite different from the theoretical knowledge one can find in textbooks or in the scientific literature. As suggested by Mills & Gearity¹⁶, the knowledge gathered in a socially simple environment such as a laboratory needs to be adapted to the realities of the socially complex environment of a coaching group.

Going Full Circle on Becoming a Better Coach

The coaching process is an iterative practice of collecting and using various sources of “training information” to improve the performance of athletes or teams. This process needs to include some form of reflective practice or introspection from the coach so that they can learn from their experiences to adapt and/or change their behaviors in a coaching environment that is dynamic, complex, and often chaotic.

This is not easy, but improving a coach’s knowledge and coaching qualities does make an impact, not only on their personal and professional development, but also on the athletes they work with.

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

Conventional military training has been well-documented and is not exactly adored by many in the strength and conditioning field. These tactical athletes are subjected to extraordinary demands, involving both extreme intensities and volumes. Across the wide spectrum of physical training, tactical athletes specifically accumulate a very high volume of running mileage (almost all at long, slow distances while also under load), push-ups, sit-ups, and pull-ups. There are consequential outcomes produced by this volume—working with athletes who have hundreds, if not thousands, of miles accumulated on long, slow runs and virtually no history of sprinting training makes for a tough task.

Of all the difficulties I’ve encountered in the six years I’ve worked in the tactical space, nothing quite compares to that of teaching these athletes how to sprint. It’s not only that we need to teach them a completely new endeavor/skill, but what really proves challenging is helping them unlearn poor mechanics they’ve developed over the years.

Of all the difficulties I’ve encountered in the six years I’ve worked in the tactical space, nothing quite compares to that of teaching these athletes how to sprint, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

In addition to the technique aspects, we also must consider the biomechanical and physiological adaptations that have already occurred. Although this isn’t always the case, most tactical athletes have greater amounts of relative type 1 (slow twitch) fibers, more robust aerobic energy systems, and connective tissue that is more conducive to distance running (brittle, collagen breakdown, oxidative, poor elasticity).¹ Furthermore, tactical athletes are at a much higher risk for developing chronic overuse injuries, particularly in the lower leg and foot, due to years of mechanical overloading.²

With this population, I routinely see an injury history of shin splints, calf strains, plantar fasciitis, Achilles tendinitis, chronic ankle sprains, and turf toe. To a lesser extent, but still prevalent, a history of compartment syndrome and severe ankle/lower leg fractures due to bad jump landings are also good to be prepared for. Injuries at virtually any part of the body will carry some level of significance, but injuries below the knee are especially influential for sprinting mechanics and capacity. Given this high-frequency injury history, it’s an absolute priority that you’re cognizant of the demands sprinting places on the lower leg and foot.

While the ground reaction forces experienced during sprinting can commonly reach 3-5xBW, the joint reaction forces at the ankle can exceed 10xBW³ and are impossible to replicate elsewhere in training. So, if nothing else, be sure that the athlete is loaded appropriately as they progress into their sprint training.

Phase 1: Develop Strength Below the Knee

Building off the point above, I would say the first step in sprinting for tactical athletes is establishing adequate strength below the knee. In short, you want to consider the intrinsic foot strength, the strength of the calf muscles (namely isometric strength), the eccentric capacity of the Achilles tendon, and then the ability to load these structures heavy and under velocity.

Beyond the strength component, we also want to provide a good amount of attention to the connective tissue. It is best to strengthen the connective tissue by applying a variety of parameters to your normal training session and to individual movements, like the ones provided above. Generally speaking, tendons respond best to heavy loads (90%+) done with eccentric tempo and need to be stressed at end range.⁴ Ligaments respond more to a variety of isometric conditions:

• Long duration
• Yielding
• Overcoming
• Under load
• Short pulsing

The optimal loading parameters for ligaments include submaximal (60%–80%) loads performed through full range of motion.⁵ Fascia, your global connective tissue, is optimized by utilizing omnidirectional movements, under a variety of stimulus and submax loading conditions (45%–65%), and movements that promote reflexive, ballistic actions.⁵ Although it’s beyond the scope of this article, also consider the demand for soft tissue care and restoration. This will become imperative for keeping injury risk lower.

I should also quickly note that there is a great demand for proprioceptive function here as well. In particular, the retinaculum that envelops the ankle plays a significant role in sensorimotor function. Retinaculum is a fibrous band of thickened fascia that is enriched with sensory bodies throughout the tissue.⁶ This means that we need to consider reactive and unanticipated drills and movements as a part of the work-up for sprinting.

Video 1. Lower Leg Analysis.

Phase 2: Introduction to Moving Fast

I say this with the utmost respect for the tactical crowd—and they are extremely impressive in their own realm—but there is quite a disconnect between most tactical and conventional athletes when it comes to dynamic movement (jumping, bounding) and especially sprinting. As I mentioned in the opening, this is an entirely new endeavor for them, so in fairness, a learning curve should be expected.

I say this with the utmost respect for the tactical crowd—there is quite a disconnect between most tactical and conventional athletes when it comes to dynamic movement, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

I think the most important thing with this is being very clear and descriptive early on about what’s involved with sprinting and what they are working toward. I’ve had a lot of success “reverse-engineering” this: describing the full end goal first and then breaking down each component as we go along. This can involve breakdowns on the whiteboard, video analysis discussing their movement patterns, or simply a good amount of repetition. As long as you are providing the athlete with context and feedback along the way, you’re doing your job. This can’t be rushed, and it cannot be treated as trivial; given the characteristics of this population, we can’t give them the keys to the Corvette and then leave them to figure out by themselves how fast it goes.

As for the training itself, I work through a standard framework for introducing speed and dynamic movement to my athletes. This includes a timely progression of general dynamics, rudiment plyos, and isolated sprinting drills as we build into submax sprinting. We generally break this out over a two- to four-week period and perform everything at submax velocities with an exclusive priority on technique and development.

The overall goal of this phase is to, quite literally, allow them to experience what it feels like to move their body faster while looking to sequence movements together with rhythm and coordination demands. I believe the biggest challenge to this, aside from a lack of exposure, is they don’t have the advantage of provided extrinsic stability that they’re accustomed to. Because of this, they are more inclined to not only feel very awkward but also have a lot of difficulty with connecting movement. Things look very choppy and disconnected as a result, and that’s okay—be patient in this phase.

Phase 3: Developing Foundational Speed

Once we’ve cleared phase two, we can now have athletes start practicing full runs and introduce acceleration. A few things to be generally aware of here:

1. These athletes perform almost all their work (and training) in kit. This creates significant compression on the anterior trunk, and on average adds 20–40 pounds on top of body mass. Because of this, I actually utilize resisted running as a precursor to full-tilt sprinting. I know this is paradoxical in the conventional sense, but in this realm, it’s pragmatic. Believe me, they will sprint better with an added 10–15 pounds.
2. Acceleration will be significantly challenging to coach early on. I’ve found that athletes can assimilate top end speed because at least it’s somewhat reflective of the shapes and positions seen in long, slow, distance running. Acceleration, on the other hand, is completely unrelatable. I believe the athletes feel completely out of sorts trying to stay low to the ground. As such, objects and implements may be your friend here.
3. Never say the words “100%” or “max effort” out loud. No matter what your training goal or directive is, I never, ever, instruct them to go above 90%. You gotta remember, this is a group of individuals who simply do not adhere to warning signs or fear outcomes. So, when they hear “100%,” it may incentivize them to push beyond something they’re capable of handling, especially with something new to them.

I mentioned that acceleration can be particularly tricky to teach. What I’ve found the most success with is using more constraint with this phase. A simple drill I’ve used is holding a PVC pipe as a physical and visual barrier for them to stay below. Another I’ve found success with is the two-step cone, which isolates the initial burst and gives them a single-point focus to emphasize their actions. Additionally, I use unloaded sleds here, so they have the opportunity to leverage their upper body into the sled to better mimic the leg action that’s desired in the acceleration phase.

Video 2. Two-step cone acceleration drill.

Some additional constraint drills I often use and have found effective include wickets, wall drills, and modified running to help clean up technique and cadence. Be mindful that the bar for adaptation here is relatively low, so almost anything will have an impact. The keys for success with improving sprinting in the tactical space are simple:

• Clear instruction.
• Good consistent cueing using basic drills and parameters.

Really, athletes just need an opportunity for repetition and feedback, and they are good-enough athletes and learners to pick it up to a point of proficiency.

Video 3. Tactical Sprint Analysis.

Closing Observations

Tissues tear when they are loaded faster than the body can respond. The most important factor with sprinting and tactical athletes is steady, logical progressions and sufficient prep work. You should always be conservative on intensity and volume prescriptions: remember, “60%” to us is “85.5%” for them.

The most important factor with sprinting and tactical athletes is steady, logical progressions and sufficient prep work, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Additionally, don’t be hesitant to have them perform resisted sprints or even use lightweight vests (< 10 pounds). Given their history of working and training in kit, this will actually be more comfortable for most, even at higher speeds. Remain very cognizant of the lower leg and foot and understand the common mechanisms of injury. There are huge differences in program and approach between an athlete coming off an Achilles tear and another coming off a Lisfranc fracture. The best instruction is clear and constructive, and from my experience, the best review is breaking down video with them.

I had a huge fear of teaching sprinting with this population, and as a result, I avoided it for years—one of the saddest mistakes of my career. But speaking especially to younger coaches, you just have to jump in and do it. It will be rough at first, but as long as you don’t put them in positions to get hurt, you can work through your errors and inefficiencies. I promise you there is no better situation where “keep it simple, stupid” applies more than teaching tactical athletes to sprint.

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. Plotkin, D.L., Roberts, M.D., Haun, C.T., and Schoenfeld, B.J., “Muscle Fiber Type Transitions with Exercise Training: Shifting Perspectives.” Sports. 2021;9(9):127.

2. Lovalekar, M., Perlsweig, K.A., Keenan, K,A., et al. “Epidemiology of musculoskeletal injuries sustained by Naval Special Forces Operators and Students.” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2017;20(6).

3. Clark, K. and Weyand, P.G. “Are running speeds maximized with simple-spring stance mechanics?” Journal of Applied Physiology. 2014;117(6):604–615.

4. Monte, A. and Zamparo, P. “Correlations between muscle-tendon parameters and acceleration ability in 20 m sprints.” PLoS ONE. 2019;14(3):e0213347.

5. Maas, H. and Sandercock, T.G. “Force transmission between synergistic skeletal muscles through connective tissue linkages.” Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology. 2010.

6. Maas, H. “Significance of epimuscular myofascial force transmission under passive muscle conditions.” Journal of Applied Physiology. 2018;126(5):1465–1473.

If you are the parent of a young athlete between the ages of 8 and 12 and are interested in their long-term athletic development, this may come as a surprise to you: the one thing they do not need at this time is a speed training program. Yes…you heard me correctly, they do not need a speed training program.

Worrying about their 40 times or pro agility tests is largely a waste of time at this age. Speed training programs are for older, adolescent athletes who are both physically and mentally mature and have developed a wide range of movement skills through proper foundational training and development. Most youth athletes are not physically prepared to take part in a speed training program because they have yet to develop the necessary physical foundation to express speed. As we will see later on, if your young athlete lacks the ability to balance on one foot for 15 seconds (which we see all the time), it may be a clue that they need a more remedial training program rather than an advanced one.

Most youth athletes are not physically prepared to take part in a speed training program because they have yet to develop the necessary physical foundation to express speed, says @JeremyFrisch. Share on X

Pushing young athletes to do any type of training program that they are not prepared to do (both physically and mentally) does not help anyone in the long run. Yes, the athlete may make a little progress at first, but they will never reap the benefits long term. And if the training program becomes a chore instead of being engaging and fun—in those cases, the athlete has little incentive to try hard.

Now, before all the track coaches and speed gurus start calling for my head, I want to make one point abundantly clear: I am in no way saying young athletes should not sprint. Quite the contrary, young athletes should be exposed to sprinting activities “all the time.” Sprinting is a fantastic activity for young athletes.

According to Dr. Mike Young, sprinting improves the communication pathways between your brain and body (which, for a young developing mind and body, seems very important), improves running mechanics, and trains many of the large athletic muscles of the lower body. All good stuff for the developing young athlete; however, they do not need to be on an advanced speed training program.

The Major Elements of Coordination

With young athletes, there should be no concern with shin angles, front side mechanics, or arm action drills, and no one should care about running specific times like the 40-yard dash. The sprinting activities that young athletes need to be exposed to should come in the form of ball games, races, pattern running, relays, and chasing activities like tag and invasion games. Children love the competitive nature of these types of activities and tend to put forth their best effort without even realizing it.

Along with lots of game-like activities, what athletes ages 8–12 really need is coordination training. Coordination is the foundation of all athletic skills. Coordination is not one singular ability, but a global system of interconnected elements. Many parents and coaches believe a child is either coordinated or uncoordinated, but that is not entirely true. Coordination has many elements that need to be developed simultaneously to improve athleticism or specific abilities—for example, like improving speed ability.

What athletes ages 8–12 really need is coordination training. Coordination is not one singular ability, but a global system of interconnected elements, says @JeremyFrisch. Share on X

Coordination is made up of seven or eight major elements, but for the purpose of this article, I will focus on the following five:

1. Balance and stability: A state of bodily equilibrium in either static or dynamic planes.
2. Rhythm: The expression of timing.
3. Spatial awareness: The ability to know where you are in space and in relation to objects.
4. Kinesthetic differentiation: The degree of force required to produce a desired result.
5. Reactive ability: The ability to respond with movement to a particular stimulus, such as sight, sound, or touch.

According to former MMA fighter and longtime strength coach Brian Grasso: Younger athletes who learn to master the elements associated with good coordination (balance, rhythm, spatial awareness, reaction, etc.) are far better off than athletes who are not exposed to this kind of exercise stimulation until advanced ages. This is an important point—even though athletes are capable of learning new skills at virtually any age, research has shown early exposure to be greatly beneficial to an athlete’s overall development. As Dr. Jozef Drabik notes in Children and Sports Training, coordination is best developed between the ages of 7 and 14, with the most crucial period being 10–13 years of age.

All young athletes will have varying strengths and weaknesses across these abilities. When I first work with a group of young athletes, I strategically set up the training session to include activities that will clue me in on how developed or undeveloped these abilities are.

Targeting Coordination in Training

As a full-time coach, I don’t have an abundance of time to walk each athlete through a specific movement assessment; instead, I informally screen the athletes with fun movement challenges. In short, I’m looking to see if the young athlete has the prerequisite ability to move well. This basic foundational movement ability will allow them to be successful and injury-free on the field of play. Think of it in terms of math skills: to be successful in advanced math, you need a good foundation of basic math skills like addition or subtraction. You don’t learn algebra in first grade.

For athletic development, it’s the same—children need to learn the basics of movement first, before doing an advanced training program or sport-specific skills. When I first work with a group of young athletes, I look to see how good they actually are at the basics. It’s a fun workout using some novel exercises and activities, while for me as the coach, it’s an opportunity to screen the athlete and get a good idea of their current level of athletic ability.

To get a better understanding of this training approach, let’s look at a typical training session and some examples of how we train for the development of coordination.

Static and Dynamic Balance

I ask the athletes to lay on the ground, then on my command, they stand up as fast as possible and balance on one leg without falling or touching the ground with the other foot for 15 seconds. We try this a few times on each foot, simply watching if the athlete can efficiently maintain balance. We then take the drill one step further by asking the athlete to balance and then hop in place, then side to side, and then in a circle.

Video 1. Rising from the ground challenges athletes to establish their balance and hops, jumps, and single leg squats are fun and foundational movements to progress into.

Finally, we use a small box for the athlete to hop up on and squat on one leg. The goal of the assessment is simple. We assess:

• Can the athlete stay up on one leg?
• Do they wobble, lose balance, or have to constantly adjust themselves by putting their other foot on the ground?
• Can they handle their own body weight while hopping?
• Can they squat down at least halfway without collapsing?

If the young athlete struggles with these tasks, that’s a clue they still need foundational work before moving to the advanced stuff that the parents and sport coaches always beg for.

How does balance relate to speed development? First off, sprinting is done on one leg. When one foot is on the ground, the other foot is off the ground, swinging through air. To sprint efficiently, the young athlete must be strong and stable when the foot hits the ground. Without good dynamic balance and stability, speed development is very difficult in the long term. Sprinting alone will not develop better balance and stability, and therefore these limitations will continue to hold the athlete back down the road.

Rhythm

My favorite way to look at rhythmic ability is simple: we ask the athlete to skip. First, we skip in a straight line. Then, we look at them skipping sideways, backward, zigzag, and finally while turning. Again, there is no perfect, set way to skip; however, with an average coaching eye, it’s easy to see which athletes have decent rhythmic ability and which ones don’t. Some things to take note of:

• Do they have to think about how to skip before doing it?
• Do they have cross-lateral movement (meaning, do their opposite arms and leg move together at the same time)?
• Can the athlete skip and also move in multiple directions?

Developing a good sense of rhythm at an early age can go a long way when learning more advanced sport-specific skills down the road, says @JeremyFrisch. Share on X

How does rhythm affect speed development? Speed is a nice combination of timing and force. The best sprinters seem to be able to not only produce a high amount of force but do it at exactly the right time. Developing a good sense of rhythm at an early age can go a long way when learning more advanced sport-specific skills down the road—and that includes the many rhythmic sprint drills that coaches love to have their athletes do.

Video 2. Forward, backward, lateral skips provide the opportunity to develop the cross-lateral movement pattern involved in countless sports skills.

Spatial/Body Awareness

Out of all the different coordination elements, spatial awareness is probably the most fun to implement. Again, spatial awareness is about the athletes knowing where they are in space and in relation to other objects—simply put, it’s your brain recognizing the environment it’s in and making the appropriate plan to navigate that environment. That is why we want young athletes to develop a wide and diverse movement skill set. The more options the brain must choose from, the more successful the movement outcome.

A great tool for this is to use a set of hurdles or hula hoops. We ask the young athletes to slowly step over and under a set of hurdles: Can they get over or under without knocking down the hurdle? Next, we move to a crawl: Can the athlete crawl under and over a set of hurdles or crawl through some hula hoops without hitting the sides?

Video 3. Common tools like cones, hoops, and PVC pipe can be used for a basic obstacle course to challenge the spatial awareness of young athletes.

This can be very challenging, as many young athletes are not used to being in this position. However, kids love the challenge of not hitting hoops or hurdles. It forces them to slow down and requires some effort to get through the course correctly instead of just speeding through it.

How important is spatial awareness in speed development? As you can probably guess, when a young athlete knows where their body parts are, how they feel and move will go a long way when teaching them different physical skills. When the body is used to moving in a variety of ways, it can micro-adjust when needed.

Most sports are not a linear game. The athlete has to deal with the ground and opponents on the field. The field may not be perfectly flat, or an opponent may suddenly appear out of nowhere. Good spatial awareness comes into play when adjustment is needed, which can mean the difference between staying free of injuries or getting injured and losing or winning the game.

Kinesthetic Differentiation

This is similar to body awareness. It’s the sense of knowing how much force a person needs to accomplish a task. A simple example is when you throw a ball to someone close, you throw it softly. When throwing a ball to someone far away, you need to throw the ball a bit harder. A great offensive lineman uses just enough force to keep the defense in front him. Too much force one way and the d-lineman may slip off in the other way.

Video 4. Jumping is not simply a matter of how high and how far, the ability for athletes to control their body in the air is also crucial.

Kinesthetic differentiation ability is precision ability. We use two different fun activities to screen and train this:

1. We ask the athlete to jump certain distances and land precisely on a spot or line on the floor. For example, jump forward off two feet and land as close to the line as possible. This can be done jumping forward, jumping sideways, or doing a 180-degree turn.
2. The other activity is called cone destruction—this is great because the athlete has to work hard to use the right force and aim to knock over the cones. There is also a fair bit of running involved, so this is a great conditioning/fitness activity. Because the activity is timed, young athletes get competitive and tend to work really hard without even realizing it.

How kinesthetic differentiation relates to speed development is simple. Intuitively knowing how much force to use for a certain task is important.

Reactive Ability

For most field and court sports, reactive ability will probably rank as number one when it comes to coveted abilities on the field of play. Reactive ability is simply decision-making ability. Most sports are played at a high speed in very chaotic situations. Having the ability to react and make the right decision quickly based on what the athlete may see or feel in front of them can be the difference between winning or losing (and not getting injured).

It’s one thing to make quick decisions, but the athlete must also have the movement toolbox to move in the correct way at the right time, says @JeremyFrisch. Share on X

Reactive ability is closely linked to other abilities, like balance and spatial awareness. It’s one thing to make quick decisions, but the athlete must also have the movement toolbox to move in the correct way at the right time. There are lots of ways to screen this ability:

• Using objects in the air.
• Using visual cues, like a coach pointing certain directions.
• Using audio cues, where the coach calls out certain directions.

A simple way to screen and train this ability is with a tennis ball. The coach stands behind the athlete and throws a ball in front of them. When the ball comes into view, the athletes sprint and grab the ball before its second bounce. Kids love the challenge of this drill, and it can give the coach some great insight on their current reaction ability.

Video 5. Game-based activities help kids develop agility, game speed, and the reactive ability to make quick decisions in competition.

How does this relate to speed development? Visuospatial awareness and peripheral vision are important in chaotic sports. Being able to have a sense of what is happening around the field even if the athlete is not directly looking that way is important—think of the no-look pass in basketball. With the tennis ball throw, the coach can get a sense of how fast the athlete can interpret the info (ball coming into view) and react to it.

Next, how fast can the athlete actually move to get the ball? Do they react fast but move slow on the first few steps? That’s a clue that the athlete may not be strong enough to get their body moving and will need to spend some time being able to handle their own body weight.

Sensitive Training Periods

As I mentioned, Jozef Drabik indicates that coordination is best developed from the ages of 7 to 14, with the most crucial period being between 10 and 13 years of age. This means that there are critical windows of development in children, also called windows of opportunity (ASM). During those pre-adolescent years, the central nervous system is highly plastic or adaptable. Meaning, with the right environment and input, we can develop and exploit these coordinative abilities to a much higher level than at any other time in life. For example, the best age to develop reactive ability for boys and girls is 8–10.

Armed with this information, we can make sure that when we work with children of this age range, the training environment is rich with reactive-type activities. We can then accelerate the learning of reactive abilities during this phase.

Before you can be great in any specific sport, you need to first become a decent all-around athlete, says @JeremyFrisch. Share on X

Before you can be great in any specific sport, you need to first become a decent all-around athlete. This starts in training by improving coordination and movement skill. An all-around skilled mover has the ability to learn sport-specific skills faster and has a wide foundation from which to build biomotor abilities like speed, power, and strength later on during adolescence.

With my athletes, I play the long game. We care very little about performance parameters during pre- and early adolescence. I realize for some coaches this is difficult in today’s results- and data-driven training industry. But to be a successful youth coach, you must develop a coaching eye.

I always encourage young coaches to learn to use their eyes before they worry about their stopwatch or weightroom numbers. How do they look? How do they move? Can they bend, reach, balance, hop, skip, and jump? After 20 years coaching, I can tell you a good mover is easy to get faster on the field and stronger in the weight room.

Become an expert at teaching movement skill. When these things are in place, speed will come along naturally. Remember, the kids are always growing. Mother Nature is making them stronger and faster every day. All we’re trying to do as coaches is exploit and elevate what she’s naturally doing.

Finally, let’s not forget the fun factor: young athletes are not mini-adults. They need less structure, less coaching, and lots of variation. Kids love trying new things, and when the novelty wears off, they want to try something else. Constantly and consistently exposing them to new activities and variations will keep it fun and keep them coming back each session. Then, one day out of nowhere, in the blink of an eye, they’ll walk in 5 inches taller, and they’ll be teenagers and ready for something new!

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

Wormhoudt, René, Savelsbergh, Geert J.P., Teunissen, Jan Willem, and Davids, Keith. Athletic Skills Model: First published 2018 by Routledge.

Drabik, Jozef. Children and Sports Training. Island Pond, VT: Stadion, 1996.

Gabbard, Carl, Elizabeth LeBlanc, and Susan Lowy. Physical education for children: Building the foundation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1994.

Grasso, Brian. “Coordination and Movement Skill Development – The key to long-term athletic development.” Mytpi.com. Improve My Game. 12/3/12.

In the last 3-5 years, the subject of optimal recovery has grown to near-cliché status in the human health and performance industry. It seems like every time I turn around there are new gadgets that help athletes better connect to their recovery, as well as push the needle in the right direction when they need to. With all the tools, techniques, and gadgets out there, it can be difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.

There’s a lot for coaches and athletes to filter when it comes to best practices in recovery, and it is way outside the scope of this article to try to cover it all. Instead, what I would like to do is provide simple, proven, and cost-effective strategies that can improve recovery using breathing techniques.

Once learned, breathing techniques are free to both coach and athlete, are virtually risk-free, and can be easily implemented into found time. This makes for an absolute no-brainer. Share on X

Once learned, breathing techniques are free to both coach and athlete, are virtually risk-free, and can be easily implemented into found time. This makes for an absolute no-brainer when deciding if you want to include these protocols on your menu of available options to improve overall adaptability and performance readiness.

Defining Recovery

Like most buzzwords, “recovery” has been overused to the point of a blandness akin to chewing on dry steel-cut oats. So it’s important that if we have a discussion about a tool to improve it, we agree upon a definition—at least while you’re reading this article. Recovery is usually thought of as the return to a normal state of mind and body: in biology, homeostasis. An interesting way to think of homeostasis is the sum range of tolerances inside an organism.

In human performance, we purposefully stress those humans in our care to elicit specific and predictable adaptations. As far as the animal kingdom is concerned, we are the only species (we know of) that purposefully doses ourselves and others with stress to elicit a prescribed adaptive response. I’ve never seen my dog running shuttles with a stopwatch in the backyard so he can finally catch that squirrel (that would be epic, though).

Of course, adding precise stress is only half of the picture. We then have to allow the system to return to a sufficient state of homeostasis that allows for more work to occur. If this cycle is repeated with proper frequency, intensity, and precision—bada bing! We are a-changin’!

Without getting too into the weeds on the aspects of specific training responses, one of the most reliable ways to measure readiness, in general, is with tools that connect to autonomic tone. The autonomic nervous system (ANS) is our deepest neural circuitry and responds to all stress in the body by managing system-wide arousal states to meet the predicted demands of both acute and predicted stress by reacting to environmental cues.

Before I go on any further, I just want to make a point that I think is essential for all coaches to hear. Sport is a neck-up phenomenon. Exercise is a neck-up phenomenon. These are both artificial environments created by humans. Your ancient stress biology has no idea in holy hell what squats are. Or what football is. It only knows how far did this push us past what we are used to? How can we avoid this and/or be ready for the next time?

Onward.

There have been a variety of indicators of athlete readiness used over the course of sports performance history, both subjective and objective. I personally know world-class coaches who place heavy stock in athlete questionnaires. Subjective feedback from athletes certainly has a place in any coach’s toolkit, but it can be tainted by personality and perspective.

Subjective feedback from athletes certainly has a place in any coach’s toolkit, but it can be tainted by personality and perspective. Share on X

While subjective data is an important part of readiness systems, it has holes that require some objective resources. Due to the fact that the ANS is such a reliable tell of how the body has responded to increased stress (arousal), we use it as a catch-all indicator of athlete readiness.

When it comes to recovery at present, the gold standard of measurement is heart rate variability or HRV. As a rule, the more variable the heart rate, the better the recovery; the less varied, the more sympathetic and less recovered. There is certainly some nuance to this, but this summarizes the idea enough for our purposes.

What we are ultimately looking at in response to stress—training or otherwise—is if when we put our feet to the fire, the system can return itself to “normal” in a timely and energy-effective manner and be prepared to be dosed again.

Now that we have a clear operational definition of recovery, let’s tackle some obvious points before we talk about supplementing breathing techniques to enhance it. If you haven’t checked these boxes, know that the techniques that follow will only mitigate the cracks in the wall. Nobody gets to skip the basics.

How Breathing Helps

As a brief aside, I want to mention that when it comes to recovery, there are some essentials. Breath control, as much as I love it, is not one of them. The essentials are sleep, nutrition, and input management. This is an article about breathing techniques to improve recovery, but if you fail to cover these bases, you’re just breathing uphill, if you catch my drift.

So then if we agree that:

1. Being “recovered” is returning to a relative homeostatic state within tolerances that allow us to receive another dose of stress.
2. In general, this is best measured by autonomic tone (by HRV, for example).

Then, tools that help the autonomic nervous system return to a state of readiness are among the most helpful tools we can use.

The feedback loop between breathing and the ANS is bidirectional. This means your respiratory system responds to cues from the ANS that adjust both the rate and the depth of breathing from moment to moment, but the ANS can also receive cues from our breathing. These are complex and deeply interwoven into our physiological survival mechanisms, which help us both make efficient use of energy in the body for defense against external threats and maintain internal homeostasis.

Normally, the homeostatic feedback loop for our some 23,000 breaths per day is adjusting to our internal and external environments literally breath by breath for the entire time we are alive. The pulmonary and cardiovascular systems work in concert to supply oxygen to the body and remove carbon dioxide. Baro and chemoreceptors that live in the aorta and carotid arteries keep track of pH (metabolic stress residue is acidic) and let the heart and lungs know how often and how hard to work.

The ANS, and thus HRV, is affected by breath through both mechanical and biochemical means. Mechanically, the diaphragm has a direct impact on the fascial envelope around the heart as well as affecting hemodynamics through pressure changes in the thoracic cavity.¹ The relationship between the two is in direct response to breath rate and depth, which, if you recall, is controlled by the body’s response to arterial pH.

This means by controlling skeletal muscles (diaphragm and superficial trunk and neck muscles) you can slide the dimmer switch on the autonomic nervous system from more sympathetic (lower HRV) to more parasympathetic (higher HRV). Slow, purposeful breathing (to the tune of six breaths/minute) tips us toward the parasympathetic side of the ANS, allowing for better rest.

Small, purposeful, and regular doses of properly applied breathing techniques can have a strong effect on recovery in both the short and long term. Share on X

With that said, just because we do some slow breathing for one session, that doesn’t necessarily mean we’re going to recover better all week long; however, small, purposeful, and regular doses of properly applied breathing techniques can have a strong effect on recovery in both the short and long term. This can have an aggregate effect over time that allows for faster and more complete rest, better recovery, and more energy to allocate toward performance.

Implementation Strategies

As with any tool, there are variances in individual applications, but there are some general approaches that are reliable and valid ways to improve recovery. When you first introduce new habits into your routine, microdose them into “found time.” Going from zero to hero with breathing will probably be short-lived, so instead use times that are congruent with these goals.

Protocol 1

Immediately after training is a great found time to include breath control techniques. This time is often spent talking smack with friends or looking at our phones while we pretend to cool down, so we might as well integrate some breathing into the mix.

Additionally, there is a tremendous problem with sleep dysfunction in our culture, and athletics is no exception (probably worse). Sleep hygiene is not the topic of this article, but one helpful sleep aid can be “tuning down” the system before bed with slow breathing techniques.

3-2-5 Resonance Breathing:

• Sit or lie comfortably.
• Inhale slowly through your nose for 3 seconds.
• Pause for 2 seconds.
• Exhale slowly out of your nose for 5 seconds.
• Try to use good mechanics. It matters!

This protocol is directly linked to the HRV research mentioned earlier. It coordinates the rhythms of the lungs, heart, and vascular system.

If you do the math, it is six breaths per minute. Five minutes of this, and you’ll be on your way to chill town.

Protocol 2

Breathe with purpose while you stretch or foam roll. You’ll get a bigger bang for your buck by including this easy-to-use protocol into already-planned cooldown sessions.

A great thing about breath control during these kinds of activities is that you’re having a conversation with the nervous system while you challenge tissues. That means you’ll have a deeper understanding of whether what you’re doing is perceived as a threat by the body or not.

This means you’ll be more precise in your application and yield better results for improving tissue quality, proprioception, and recovery all at once.

• Inhale slowly through your nose for 3 seconds.
• Pause for 3 seconds and at the same time isometrically contract the muscles you’re working on.
• Exhale for 4-8 seconds through your nose.
• Repeat 3-5 times while you work on the area in question.
• Practice good mechanics.

Recover Better

How well we recover from stress is a massive topic and one I’ll spend the rest of my life trying to better understand and explain. There are so many options that involve technology and a library of libraries on social media, experts with the newest this and the latest that to help you get back sooner and stronger.

There are many options to help recover from stress, but much of it is out of reach and unscalable across an entire team. Slow breathing works, it’s easy to learn, and it’s free. Share on X

Here’s the thing—much of this stuff works, but just as much of it is either bull crap or out of reach and unscalable. I love ice baths but scaling ice baths for an entire high school cross country team is out of reach for most. Same for sauna. Same for Normatec boots. And so on.

Slow breathing is such a great tool because it works, it’s easy to learn, and it’s free. An average middle school soccer player can use it to great benefit and so can the MVP of the All-Star Game in the NBA.

Start with the small steps in this article and aim to use them frequently and with a focus on the quality of the application. I promise that you will not find a more ubiquitous recovery tool anywhere.

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

Resources

1. Russo, Marc A., Santarelli, Danielle M., and O’Rourke, Dean. “The Physiological Effects of Slow Breathing on the Healthy Human.” Breathe. 2017;13(4):209-309.

2. Li, Changjun, Chang, Qinghua, Zhang, Jia, and Chai, Wenshu. “Effects of slow breathing rate on heart rate variability and arterial baroreflex sensitivity in essential hypertension.” Medicine. 2018;97(18):p e0639.

3. West, John B. Respiratory Physiology, The Essentials, Tenth Edition.

4. Levy, Matthew. Cardiovascular Physiology, Ninth Edition.

You’ve probably heard of the 10,000 hours rule—essentially, this rule states that it takes around 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to become an expert. The rule itself was popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, who built on initial research by Anders Ericsson. Ericsson’s key research, carried out on musicians, demonstrated that expert musicians spent significantly more time engaged in deliberate practice than less successful musicians, with a relationship between the amount of deliberate practice and the level of expertise—a finding replicated across domains (but not unchallenged). The theory, at least as espoused here, is that the more time spent practicing—and, hence, the earlier we begin deliberate practice—the more likely we are to become experts.

Now, it’s important for me to state that I hate the 10,000 hours rule, or at least the version that has become popularized (Ericsson distanced himself from Gladwell’s own retelling of the research). I don’t think that everyone can become world class at something by just accumulating sufficient hours of deliberate practice; in sports—especially sports such as track and field—I believe that genetics play a huge role in both how good we can become and how much we can improve.

I don’t think that everyone can become world class at something by just accumulating sufficient hours of deliberate practice, says @craig100m. Share on X

Other researchers agree with me; the heritability of elite athlete status, for example, has been calculated at around 66%, meaning that our genetics certainly do have a role in how good we can become. This isn’t to say that practice isn’t important—it certainly is—but that it’s not the only thing that determines how good we can be. I even wrote about this, from the view of sprinting, for this website. In short, I feel like everyone can get better, but not everyone can be world class.

And yet I keep coming back to the idea of expert performance.

Ericsson’s initial research was looking at experts—people who are very good at what they do. There are many different types of experts, such as knowledge experts, expert drivers, really good actors. In sport, we often don’t use the term expert, but instead focus on adjectives such as “world class” or “elite.” In track and field, I’m not entirely sure the two are the same: an elite athlete might have the physical characteristics required for success in their event, but are they an expert? Can they accurately explain the processes by which they gain performance success? Do they even need to? In track and field I feel there are two main mental models of performance, which I call the biomechanical model and the physiological model. In the biomechanical model, coaches and athletes aim to understand the key mechanical underpinnings of performance in their event, and then develop training sessions and plans to optimize these. In the physiological model, coach and athlete do the same, but through a physical lens.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with these two models (and, like all models, they are a dramatic oversimplification), but what if we start to consider what “expert” might look like in track and field? I’d argue that the main goal of competition for elite athletes is to win competitions, or at least finish as high as possible in competitions, with greater weight placed on competitions of increased importance, such as the Olympics/Paralympics and World Championships. To do this, athletes need to have the physical characteristics required for success, but also be able to deliver the required performance on the day that it matters. This means that other factors come into play: an effective taper, the ability to perform under pressure, and making the correct tactical decisions in the heat of competition. This is where I think expertise comes into track and field; it’s all about using what you have to deliver a successful performance.

As my thinking in the area of expertise in sport has developed over the last couple of years, so has my interest. As such, I recently picked up Developing Sport Expertise (edited by Damian Farrow, Joe Baker, and Clare MacMahon). Specifically, I picked up the first edition of this book published in 2007, but there is also a more recent 2013 version that I’m about to work my way through. The stimulus for this specific textbook was a workshop held at the Australian Institute of Sport in 2005 on the topic of Applied Sport Expertise and Learning. Each person attending the workshop was asked three key questions:

1. What does your research tell us about the development of elite athletes?
2. How can this information be used to optimize training and performance?
3. Do your findings apply to talent ID programs?

As individual coaches, questions 1 and 2 are perhaps more pertinent; however, for more developed practitioners looking to move into more management or leadership positions, question 3 is also important. Given the expertise of the various authors of chapters within this book, it’s worth us taking a closer look at some of the key topics and themes contained within.

What Does an Expert Look Like?

In the first chapter, Bruce Abernethy explores what expert performance looks like and how experts may differ from non-experts—aspects that are crucial in our understanding of developing sport expertise. Abernethy writes that, in sport, expert performance is characterized by factors such as:

• Pattern recognition and recall—experts are better than non-experts in recognizing or recalling patterns of play within sport. As an example, expert chess players can recognize key patterns of play, but this is highly specific; if the chess pieces are arranged randomly on the board, they are no better than beginners at determining what will happen next.

Experts are better than non-experts in recognizing or recalling patterns of play within sport, says @craig100m. Share on X

• The ability to multitask and undertake automatic movement—expert performers are much better at performing two sport-related tasks simultaneously than non-experts. In track and field, an expert relay runner would be better at receiving visual information as to the position of the incoming runner and simultaneously being able to run as fast as possible during the change than a non-expert.
• Superior sports-specific knowledge and tactics—experts understand more about performance in their sport than non-experts, and, as a result, can select better tactics and make better decisions, increasing the chances of success.
• Anticipation—experts are much better than beginners at anticipating what may happen within their unique sporting context. This can be crucial in sports such as football, where the player picks up cues from other players as to what might happen next—and hence is better prepared for it.

Expertise in sport is also highly specific; when standardized tests are used (e.g., a visual reaction time test or a test of general intelligence), experts often don’t outperform non-experts.

So how do we become experts?

The research, writes Abernethy, points to three key aspects (only one of which is under our control):

1. The time of year in which we’re born (the relative age effect—which, in track and field at least, becomes less important the older we get).
2. Where we grow up (growing up in less densely populated areas appears to increase the chances of sporting success).
3. The quality and type of practice we undertake.

Practice needs to be deliberate, which is defined as requiring concentrated physical and/or cognitive effort undertaken with the specific goal of improving performance. This definition is important, because it suggests such practice is somewhat unenjoyable—something we will return to later.

Practice needs to be deliberate, which is defined as requiring concentrated physical and/or cognitive effort undertaken with the specific goal of improving performance, says @craig100m. Share on X

If practice is crucial, how do we as coaches set the environment for the development of expertise? Here is what Abernethy suggests:

1. Utilize training that addresses the limiting factors of performance—practice is only likely to be beneficial if it is directly aimed at developing factors that are limiting to the athlete’s performance. This means that we need to:
   • Understand what factors are required for success.
   • Understand where the athlete currently sits on these factors.
   • Understand how to actually improve these things.
2. Utilize perceptual training (where relevant)—if a key driver of expertise is pattern recall and recognition to support decision-making, then enhancing the perception skills of the athlete is highly important. At the simplest level, this involves exposure to a large and varied number of potential situations, allowing the athlete to build up a “mental library” of situations and potential outcomes—and test these outcomes—to optimize their expertise.
3. Utilize variety and diversity—as highlighted above, exposure to various different scenarios enhances an athlete’s expertise.
4. Maximizing practice opportunities—if practice is crucial to the development of expertise, then we need to ensure developing athletes can get as much as is optimal. This requires good access to facilities, good coaching, and a peer group willing to practice (which includes play) with the athlete.
5. Create experiences that encourage strategic skill development—one potential reason why athletes from smaller towns or cities may be more likely to have adult success is that they have to start competing against adults earlier. This means that they need to develop the strategic skills required to beat “better” opponents and can’t rely on their physical skills. Exposure to challenging competition is, therefore, an important aspect of developing expert performers.

How do We Develop Elite Athletes as Skilled Performers?

Following Abernethy’s introduction, the book moves into section one, which looks at developing elite athletes. In the first chapter of this section, Jean Cote and Jessica Fraser-Thomas explore how, if accumulation of practice is a driver of expert performance, this changes over the athlete’s career. This is an important discussion primarily because early on, the deliberate practice research was interpreted to indicate that athletes should specialize very early in order accumulate the required volumes of practice; however, research across many sports, especially track and field, actually suggests the opposite: late specialization is probably best for adult elite performance.

This research, which appears (on the surface at least) to oppose the 10,000 hours “rule,” led Cote and his research colleagues to develop the Developmental Model of Sport Participation (DMSP). This model outlines the three stages of an athlete’s development towards adult elite performance: the sampling years (age 6-12), where the future athlete plays many different sports, often in an unstructured play format; the specializing years (ages 13-15), where the athlete starts to focus on a smaller number of sports; and then the investment years (from age 16 onwards), where the athlete commits to (usually) one sport, and begins to undertake deliberate practice.

Cote’s research, and that of others, ultimately suggests that early diversification moving towards increased specialization and deliberate practice with increased age is the most optimal way to develop expert performers.

In the next chapter, Joe Baker and Steve Cobley provide some guidelines for implementing deliberate practice into our daily coaching practices, specifically:

1. When designing a long-term training plan, consider the role of deliberate practice—this suggests considering maximizing the time we get with the athletes we work with, focusing on quality of practice, and considering how each individual training session fits into the bigger picture of the previous and upcoming week, month, and year.
2. Be wary of the negative consequences of deliberate practice—by definition, deliberate practice takes effort and is not that enjoyable. As such, regular breaks of play or non-deliberate practice may be helpful in maintaining the freshness of athletes.
3. Develop a strategic plan for training—it’s important to know what drives performance success in your sport, what “elite” looks like, and where the athletes you work with compare to this “elite” state. Being strategic about this process can set you up for future success.
4. Monitor training stress to prevent training ineffectiveness—if an athlete is not in an optimized state to adapt to the training they’re undertaking, then the time spent will be ineffective. Having a good idea of the adaptive potential of the athlete via monitoring should assist in ensuring that any training they do undertake can be as effective as possible.

If an athlete is not in an optimized state to adapt to the training they’re undertaking, then the time spent will be ineffective, says @craig100m. Share on X

For readers interested in further understanding how to move from the theory of deliberate practice to using it in practice, I’d highly recommend this article on “operationalizing” deliberate practice in sport.

Building on this, Bradley Young and Nikola Medic explore how coaches can develop long-term commitment in their athletes—something that is clearly important given the high levels of effort and low levels of enjoyment of deliberate practice. There is surprisingly little research on this topic, but Young and Medic identify some key themes that coaches can utilize to, in their words, take athletes “from the backyard to the big show.” The first of these themes is supporting an individual’s quest for competence and mastery, with the advice being that coaches should find ways to enhance an athlete’s perception of competence. Athletes who have a task-oriented motivation (as opposed to ego-oriented), appear to be more likely to seek out mastery and competence. There are some key ways to do this, including:

1. Ensuring successful experiences—successful adult athletes appear to have been offered more opportunities to experience success in training during their developmental years. As such, coaches may wish to simplify drills, challenges, or competition rules to better match the developmental stage of the athlete.
2. Provide successful role models—when athletes observe a successful performance from someone else, it can increase their feelings of persistence. This is especially true when the skill is new to the athlete, and the model is of a similar age and level of competence—the message being “if you can do this, I can too.” Through the use of video review, athletes can also serve as their own role models by watching themselves deliver a successful performance to develop their own feelings of competence.
3. Provide verbal persuasion—if coaches are trustworthy, credible, and thought to be in possession of their own expertise, then the messages they provide to athletes are much more likely to be listened to and used by the athlete to change their behavior towards mastery.

When designing training sessions in support of feelings of competence, it’s important for coaches to focus on supporting athletes in learning the processes of performance, as opposed to highlighting a successful competitive outcome, as this allows athletes to develop task-oriented, as opposed to ego-oriented, motivation.

Coaches can do this using the TARGET framework:

• Task Design—use drills that are varied and diverse.
• Autonomy—involve the athlete in the learning process.
• Recognition—provide positive feedback for good practice habits; doing this in private supports development of task orientation, while doing in front of a large group increases feelings of ego orientation.
• Grouping—placing athletes into groups may promote ego orientation (due to competition); instead, a focus on individual or small-group drills may be beneficial.
• Evaluation—athletes should be supported in their ability to self-evaluate their development.
• Timing—Due to differences in learning speed, the time allocated for the completion of a practice task should be flexible and relevant to each athlete.

The second key theme highlighted by Young and Medic is that long-term motivation in athletes depends on their ability to self-regulate; i.e., they develop their own motivation to practice. This is done by providing positive reinforcement when the athlete exhibits a desirable behavior—in this case, self-directed practice. This can be done via parents (who instill a sense of routine around practice, along with a value for sport and high expectations); coaches (with research demonstrating coaches who take a special interest in the athlete; offer praise, approval, and tangible rewards; and monitor and track progress—for example, by a training log—are more likely to support the self-regulation of athletes); and other key peers.

Long-term motivation in athletes depends on their ability to self-regulate, says @craig100m. Share on X

The third and final theme is that expert motivation requires a progressive commitment to one sport. Similar to the DMSP model, the Sport Commitment Model highlights that attractive alternatives are a key factor that is negatively related to commitment. As such, future expert performers need to progressively focus their motivation towards fewer and fewer options as they develop, but those diverse sport experiences early in their development are still crucial for the development of expertise.

The Coach as an Expert Performer

So far, we’ve focused on athletes, but it’s clear that coaches can also develop expertise. This is the topic of Chapter 6 of Developing Sport Expertise, from Sean Horton and James Deakin. The first issue here is defining what “expertise” is from a coaching standpoint. We tend to judge coaches on the performances of their athletes, but clearly there are some big issues with this approach. Instead, Horton and Deakin take a different approach, asking two main questions:

1. What do expert coaches see that others don’t?

Research across a variety of sports highlights that expert coaches can extract more information from what they see and provide better solutions in feedback to the athletes they work with—something that is true of experts across a variety of domains.

2. What do expert coaches do that non-experts don’t?

Research observing expert coaches suggests they spend the majority of practice time (60%) observing performance. The reminder of the practice time is spent on instruction (32%) and everything else (8%).

With these questions in mind, we can draw some key themes to support our own coaching:

1. Expert coaches are very good at designing effective practice sessions—they employ key sporting principles that utilize deliberate practice to enhance performance. At the highest level, the majority of coaching is only going to make small refinements (given that elite athletes are already experts) or find areas to develop that their competitors haven’t considered. Expert coaches tend to be able to do more with the limited practice time they have available—i.e., they don’t waste time at practice.
2. Expert coaches develop drills that simulate competitive scenarios—they focus on being able to prepare their athletes to demonstrate their expertise in the competitive arena. They are also able to support their athletes to perform when under pressure via the use of simulation in training.
3. Expert coaches deliver a suitable practice environment—they match high standards with emotional warmth to support the development of the athletes they work with.

Designing Effective Practice

As highlighted by Horton and Deakin in their chapter, an important role for coaches in the development of expert athletes is based around designing and delivering effective practice sessions. This aspect is the focus of the later chapters of the book. Rich Masters authored a chapter on implicit skill learning in athletes, with the key takeaway being that the use of metaphors to guide athletes in their skill development is highly effective—in part because it reduces “internalizing” the movement, and so prevents overthinking.

An important role for coaches in the development of expert athletes is based around designing and delivering effective practice sessions, says @craig100m. Share on X

This links to the next chapter, from Robin Jackson and Sian Beilock, on performing under pressure—a key skill for all expert performers. One risk factor for this is thinking too much, hence the potential importance of implicit skill learning. Finally, Jae Patterson and Timothy Lee have a chapter on how to organize practice, with the key take aways for coaches being the importance of providing a variety of feedback types and utilizing observational learning.

The Future?

The final chapter from Janet Starkes explores the past, present, and future of sport expertise research and practice. This is interesting because of the predictions made; as this book is now just over 15 years old, we can look to see how many of these have come true. Starkes makes four key predictions; the first is that web-casting will become economically feasible and technologically easy, making virtual conferences and meetings much more likely. As the last couple of years have shown, this is now the case, and we’re arguably much better connected because of it.

The second prediction highlighted the need for greater information sharing between coaches and sport scientists. It’s hard to tell whether this gap has been closed; there is still tension between some coaches and sports scientists, while some manage that relationship really well. As the team around the athlete inevitably grows over the coming years, sports scientists being able to develop the softer skills to effectively work within a team will become even more important, as well the ability of the coach to welcome outside input.

The third prediction from Starkes is the need to redefine what high performance is; as masters sports become increasingly popular, we are going to see high performance athletes of ever-increasing ages. Understanding how to develop their expertise will support them in their athletic pursuits. Finally, Starkes writes that the gap between haves and have-nots in sports is likely to widen; countries with more money to allocate to sports are likely to pull away from their less-rich competitors, especially in sports where technology is important.

To a large extent, this has been proven right. For example, in technology-driven sports like cycling, economically developed nations tend to dominate. However, in sports where overall costs are lower—such as athletics—we’ve actually seen an increased distribution of medals across countries, something that is very pleasing to see.

Final Thoughts

As I said in the introduction, I’ve never really thought of elite performance as “expert” performance, and so this book has been a bit of a paradigm shift for me. The key point to me is how we design training sessions to support the development of expertise in our athletes, with this expertise showing itself as the athlete being able to deliver a successful performance under pressure.

The key point to me is how we design training sessions to support the development of expertise in our athletes, says @craig100m. Share on X

This then opens the door to a better understanding of skill acquisition and how it might transfer to coaching in track and field, along with ideas such as representative design in which we ensure that training sessions mimic what happens in competition. This requires us to adequately understand what actually happens in competitions; this sounds obvious, but do we really know what happens in races, especially those where tactics come into play? If we can get to this point, and if we can adequately operationalize the principles of deliberate practice, we should be able to successfully develop expert performers. This book, for me, is the first step on this journey.

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

One of the most important components to any training program is the intent with which the movements are performed. You can have the “best” program with the world’s top technology, but if the drills are being performed with lackluster intent, long-term results will be minimal at best. One of the most effective ways to maximize intent is to find ways to measure what you’re doing. A big thing I’ve added to my training programs over the last year is more consistent measurements and specifically drills that can be measured.

A big thing I’ve added to my training programs over the last year is more consistent measurements and specifically drills that can be measured, says @JoeyBergles. Share on X

I work primarily with junior high and high school athletes (12-18 years old). When a sprint is being timed, a medicine ball throw distance is being recorded, or a jump distance is being measured, the intent of the subsequent drills goes up substantially. It’s a very reductionist statement, but that is what will drive adaptations. For me, if I can have drills done with a consistently high level of focus and intent, I feel confident that long-term progress will be made.

Making It Work in the High School Setting

Now, the difficulty with this concept is that, like most high school S&C coaches, I’m working with anywhere from 30-110 athletes at one time. This obviously presents some unique challenges, especially when you don’t have interns or a sports science department.

I’ve had to find some unique ways to structure things so that there’s good flow and we’re still able to measure what I want to get measured. There might be a circuit where we’ve got four different drills going with 100 athletes. That doesn’t mean that every drill is getting measured and recorded, but in that example, there might be a jump distance measured, a sprint being timed, and then two other drills that make up the rest of the circuit.

I do different types of medicine ball throws, different sprint variations (acceleration and MaxV), and various types of jumps (both horizontal and vertical). There are some things measured weekly and others that might only be measured a couple times a year. The benefit of this, though, is that I can look back to last year and see, for example, what an athlete’s seven-hop distance was—even if we haven’t done it in six months.

I keep a digital record board in my weight room for both boys and girls. The following are the tests on display:

• Vertical jump
• Broad jump
• 2+10-yard sprint
• Flying 10-yard (boys: 30-yard build; girls: 20-yard build)
• Medicine ball overhead throw (6-pound MB)
• Curve sprint (custom – standardized)

What I’ve Dropped

This all leads into what I’ve dropped out of my program, which makes all of the above possible: I no longer personally record numbers. All of the measurements that are tracked within our S&C program are 100% the responsibility of each individual athlete. We’re lucky to have the software that we do that makes that possible, but even if we didn’t have it, I would find a way to use Google Sheets or something similar.

I no longer personally record numbers. All of the measurements that are tracked within our S&C program are 100% the responsibility of each athlete, says @JoeyBergles. Share on X

As coaches, we always hear about “the process,” and a big part of my process involves athletes taking ownership of their respective performance numbers. If I ask an athlete what their best vertical jump is, I don’t want them to have to look at a sheet that says what that number is. I want them to know what it is, because if they know what it is, that means it matters to them—and when something matters to someone, they generally work harder and perform the work with more intent.

Also, when they’re doing that test, if they hit a PR, they instantly know it. That’s the long-term process since there won’t be PRs every session. When they do happen, though, it means something. It means all the work they’ve been putting in has led to a specific result.

In addition to junior high and high school, I work with younger kids, and I’ve got fourth graders who can tell me the time for the best flying 10-yards they’ve ever run (which likely happened six weeks ago, not yesterday). If 10-year-olds can remember something, I don’t believe it’s a stretch to think that most high school athletes can remember what their best performance numbers are.

I’ll give two examples regarding how athletes recording their own performance numbers works in practice:

1. 1. Vertical Jump. First off, we use jump mats. I either have vertical jumps performed with our main movement or after they come into the weight room following speed/plyometric work. The athlete steps on the jump mat and jumps. Either a coach or a player calls out their number is (e.g., 30.6 inches). The athlete is told what their jump was. They then go into the system for that day and input their vertical jump number into the system. If they know coming into that session that their best vertical jump was 30.2 inches, they instantly know they hit an all-time PR, which is a big deal.

 

1. Flying 10-Yard. We use Freelap and have 20 chips. Athletes run their flying 10-yard. A coach stands at the end of the run and calls the time that the athletes ran while they’re coasting out of the sprint. Normally, we run anywhere from 1-3 reps. I tell the athletes to remember what their best time of that session was, and then they input that number into the system. Say coming into that session their all-time best was 1.03 seconds, and they run 1.06 and 1.02; that 1.02 was better than they’ve ever run before, so again, another PR.

I like to think I’m pretty detail-oriented. With testing, there are a lot of details that can be overlooked that affect the results of the test, such as taking a small approach step on a jump or starting 2 inches behind the line on a 2+10-yard sprint. (Two yards is the fly zone—any additional distance affects the subsequent time and now makes the test unstandardized.)

These are all things I routinely bring up with my athletes, so that when they’re performing the tests, we’re always standardized. First and foremost, I want accurate information. That allows us to see long-term trends. When I look at a piece of data from eight months ago, I need to assume that data is accurate and the test was performed how it should be.

I’ll be honest, this is a huge challenge when dealing with hundred of athletes. With that said, though, I had (85) eighth grade girls do this exact thing with their broad jump and vertical jump numbers. It saves so much time and allows so many more tests to be performed on a regular basis.

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

Single-leg squats, lunges, or a traditional squat? There is an ongoing discussion about what will bring your athlete the best sport-specific result. The arguments are valid and robust for both the unilateral proponents and the bilateral enthusiasts.

The traditional squat, pegged as “the king of leg exercises,” allows the whole system to be overloaded to push adaptation, releases anabolic hormones, teaches both sides to work together, and is often used to build base strength and muscle development. Opponents would argue it is not sport-specific in many cases, causes too much spine loading, and increases the risk of injury—especially in those unfamiliar with the proper technique. Add in differences in force production (bilateral deficit or facilitation) and muscle activation (changes in co-activation), and the answers become murkier as to what is the “best.”

I’ve always followed the notion that there are very few wrong exercises, just different applications. Furthermore, there is probably no “best” option, just better solutions. Share on X

I’ve always followed the notion that there are very few wrong exercises, just different applications. Furthermore, there is probably no “best” option, just better solutions. At face value, positioning the body and executing exercises in the movement you want to improve seems to make sense, and research would also support this.^1,2 Squats are standard options for enhancing strength and power in double leg performances like rowing and skiing. Walking lunges are typical in building muscle power for running, and single-leg squats for cutting and traditional lunges for deceleration are other common exercise prescriptions for proponents of unilateral training.

But do they replicate the muscle activation patterns you expect them to mimic?

Having a curious mind, I wanted to investigate this further to get some more insight into how these exercises train (or don’t train) the involved muscles. To keep things relatively simple, I took a comparative approach. I looked at muscle activation via EMG monitoring (FREEEMG, BTS Bioengineering) and kinematic (approximate center of mass acceleration and velocity (G-Sensor, BTS Bioengineering)) measurements between the bilateral squat and various unilateral exercises.

The Results

With the results compared as a ratio of the highest EMG amplitude achieved in the given muscle during all the exercises, you can immediately see the increases in amplitude during the concentric phase, which is about the last 40% of the movement.

When looking at many squiggly lines, it can be tough to draw significant conclusions. Restating the differences as mean averages during the concentric portion allows a narrower focus—the one caveat is that the forward lunge had an overall shorter activation period than the other exercises.

Video 1. The forward lunge, showing acceleration, velocity, and muscle activation during one repetition. Red is vastus lateralis, green is gluteus maximus, purple is adductor longus, and yellow is semitendinosus in millivolts.

Shorter, higher-intensity bursts of activity achieved in the glute max, semitendinosus, and adductor longus—as seen in the forward lunge—could have a different training effect on the muscles. For simplicity’s sake, we will assume that the mean activation is a reasonable representation of muscle activity during the concentric phase.

Differences in amplitude are generally related to the tension the nervous system believes the muscle needs to generate to cause the required movement. Working backward, the amount of weight you choose and your exercise technique have an influence. I wanted to make sure the load on the lead leg was similar in all the movements, so I used a vertical force platform to measure the ground reaction force in the lowest part of the movement.

The unilateral exercises required an additional 60 pounds to counteract the unloading effect of the back leg, except for the Bulgarian squat (50 pounds). This extra weight put me in the same ballpark as the leg in the single-leg squat and presumably the bilateral squat. The added resistance for the unilateral exercises resulted in roughly an 8 to 10 rep max. Could I have gone heavier with an enthusiastic coach cheering me on? Possibly.

Another explanation for differences in amplitude between these compound movements is that coordination among muscle groups could differ in lunge variations versus squat variations. Other than the split squat and forward lunge, the exercises showed higher gluteus maximus activation, which may have assisted in decreasing the force-generating requirements of the quadriceps group. Combine this with lower co-activation in the hamstring muscles and a center of mass that shifts forward; the force required from the quads may have been less to complete the movement. Aspects of this and how it affects the bilateral deficit regarding muscle coordination are detailed in an article by Enrico Rejc et al.³

With aiming for the amount of vertical ground reaction force to be similar, one might expect comparable activation levels. However, some research has shown higher activation in unilateral over bilateral movements.⁴ Interestingly, the bilateral deficit does not occur in all athletes. Bilateral facilitation, where the force of both legs during a bilateral exercise exceeds the sum of the unilateral movements, is often seen in weightlifters, powerlifters, rowers, and downhill skiers, to name a few.⁵ Evidence reinforces this notion that you build strength in the specific way you train and move.

Training with unilateral movements appears to carry over by enhancing the bilateral deficit, which seems to improve unilateral power production and change of direction ability but not necessarily linear speed.⁶ One caution is that it does not seem to relate to the total number of unilateral exercises performed in the training period.⁷ The adage here would imply quality over quantity, so choose your unilateral exercises carefully and don’t necessarily think the more unilateral exercises, the better.

The more critical issue here is that each athlete can have different intra- and inter-muscle coordination patterns based on training history and genetic makeup. Share on X

The more critical issue here is that each athlete can have different intra- and inter-muscle coordination patterns based on training history and genetic makeup. In the past, I have been surprised at how similar coordination patterns can be in the same individual across a wide variety of exercises despite the exercise having different movement patterns.

Overall, quad muscle activity was similar to slightly lower between the squat and the unilateral exercise. Also, the single-leg squat resulted in higher vastus medialis activity at the beginning of the concentric movement during the propulsion stage. The unilateral training resulted in lower rectus femoris activation, possibly because of the more significant forward lean.

On average, biceps femoris activation was lower, along with slightly lower muscle activity in semitendinosus. The hip stabilizers (glute max, glute med, and hip adductors) tended to be greater in unilateral exercises (particularly glute med) than in the bilateral squat. We often see this pattern in the literature, most likely due to unilateral movements requiring more significant hip and knee stabilization.^8,9

This last point got me wondering if that activation was enough to cause an actual training effect. Although the difference in muscle activation may have statistical significance, does it have physiological significance? In other words, were those muscles working as hard as a typical “work set” of 8 to 10 reps that we might prescribe for regular strength or muscle development? Can we expect to switch from squats to a single-leg squat and still adequately strengthen the hip stabilizers enough to withstand the high loads experienced during competition?

Can we expect to switch from squats to a single-leg squat and still adequately strengthen the hip stabilizers enough to withstand the high loads experienced during competition? Share on X

This last notion keeps me up at night, so to put my suspicions to rest and for better sleep for all coaches, I put it to the test.

Are the Muscles Getting the Right Amount of Stimulation?

If we assume that a set of 8–10 reps to failure is enough to cause strength gains, and the resultant muscle activation is a decent gauge of that intensity (generally accepted, but not without debate^10,11), my next step was to compare unilateral isolation-type exercises on the examined muscles once again to the bilateral squat at the same intensity.

The following charts show muscle activation in the selected exercises compared to traditional squats. Also, as we mentioned previously, keep in mind that the forward lunge had a shorter concentric propulsion phase with briefer muscle activity. This would cause the mean values for the forward lunge to be lower because of similar periods but shorter bursts of muscle activity.

When looking at the difference between directly training the abductors (glute med), there is no contest comparing cable adduction to the traditional squat. Previously, we saw that the single-leg squat had approximately 200% greater activity than squats during the lifting portion and was most likely acting in a limited range as a stabilizer. Focusing on training the glute med with cable abduction had pushed activation to well over 350%, which is nearly double how it behaved in the single-leg movement. Granted, in this case, it was more of a dynamic motion across a more extensive range that can give greater values, but also may be more representative of how it behaves during lateral movements.

There was less of a difference in glute max activation among all the exercises where it played an active role in the movement. In the forward lunge, although the glute max had the most significant peak EMG amplitude from the line graphs, it had the lowest MEAN activation (remember the length of the concentric period as it drove the body back to the starting position). Single-leg and Bulgarian squats, along with reverse lunges (and most likely forward lunges), were similar to the two types of kickbacks, probably because they were already reasonably active in the squat. Perhaps statistically significant, but was it physiologically important?

Hip adduction resulted in a much higher increase in the activation of the adductor longus (over four times greater mean activation) compared to the squat and more than any of the unilateral exercises.

It is intriguing and perhaps meaningful that the lunges resulted in 50% less activation in the rectus femoris for the lead leg. Share on X

Squats were still the leader in quad activation for all the relevant exercises. The exceptions were for vastus medialis in the single-leg squat and rectus femoris in the leg extension. It is intriguing and perhaps meaningful that the lunges resulted in 50% less activation in the rectus femoris for the lead leg. If this is physiologically relevant, it may be good to include exercises that challenge this muscle specifically; however, it is also possible that the rear supporting leg (which was not assessed) may have had more activation in the rectus femoris than the front leg. Whether this level of lower activation in the front leg would increase the risk of injury or impede hip flexion would be an excellent question to ask.

The other finding of interest was the relatively low activation level of the hamstrings during the compound movements versus the single-leg curl exercise and kickback exercises. The lower level of the semitendinosus could be of significant interest to those looking to avoid ACL injury. Although research appears to be sparse, at least one study I came across suggests that the medial hamstrings (of which the semitendinosus is one) could play a role in stabilizing the knee.¹²

Muscles Creating Movement

With a better understanding of how the muscles are activating to produce force, we can pull it together to see how the body accelerates through unilateral and bilateral exercises.

In the propulsion stage of any movement, you will see increasing force typically at the lowest center of mass, both at the end of the eccentric phase and at the beginning of the concentric phase. We hope to mimic this in specific strength training to match the movement’s knee, hip, and ankle angles. However, force production is also the coordination of agonists working together while antagonists relax. Since most unilateral leg exercises focus on vertical force, lateral force production suffers, resulting in less influence on change of direction (COD).¹³

Side lunges and other resisted lateral movements combined with gameplay-specific drills would help address this aspect for improving COD. The forward lunge showed the highest side-to-side and frontward changes in acceleration and velocity from our exercises, with the reverse lunge coming in a distant second.

Trying to get game-specific velocities in the gym can be problematic, if not impossible, for many sports. Therefore, focusing on the rate of force development can be a wise choice. Currently, there is a need for more specific research to confirm the benefits of choosing unilateral or bilateral exercises and the effect on speed and RFD. Still, the safe assumption is it develops from both approaches,¹⁴ mainly when the focus is on the intention to move quickly.¹⁵

Generally, bilateral movements can generate higher velocities through a similar range of motion, partly because they require less balance. Speeds were not vastly different in our case, as there was no intention to move as quickly as possible. Additionally, during many lower-body unilateral strength movements, the center of mass often shifts forward, closer to the knee, as the athlete leans forward, reducing the torque on the knee.

This motion minimizes the force the quadriceps muscles need to generate, and we can see the lower activation levels that reinforce this idea. The upside is that our unilateral movements are improving proprioception and getting closer to the requirements of the sport. The downside is that they could be unloading the quadriceps in both the eccentric and concentric ranges of motion, which is the opposite of the demands of producing higher forces during the propulsion stage.

Applying Unilateral and Bilateral Training for Sport

If your goal is to transfer appropriate force production during unilateral-type sports (running, throwing, field events, etc.), you should incorporate unilateral strength movements during the appropriate phase closer to the season. Unilateral exercises give the most significant crossover benefit during the first 6-8 weeks, with diminishing returns for more extended periods. Therefore, using these during the final prep phases would be wise, as long-term use probably does not improve the result.¹⁶

Unless your athletes spend a significant amount of time moving up and down, you would want to choose strength exercises, plyometrics, and drills that emphasize horizontal movement for training change of direction.¹⁷ Although the ability to move quickly to decelerate and change direction should improve with unilateral training, linear speed may not.¹⁸ To be able to outrun or catch your opponents, stick with the basics—good old actual sprint training to pull it all together.¹⁹

When assessing bilateral strength levels, differences of around 10% between left and right limbs are considered normal. With differences that are greater than 15%, the concern for injury arises, as well as how it may ultimately affect performance. More specifically, the power production for the side that is less than the other may impair performance on that weaker side, though only to a certain point. Once critical power has reached a certain power threshold, it does not seem to be as big of a factor for performance.²⁰ If there’s too great of an imbalance in strength and power below threshold levels (greater than 15%), you may get to the point where one side may overpower the other.

In addition, it appears unilateral training has its most significant effect on younger and more inexperienced athletes. As an athlete improves skill and execution with increased experience, their ability to transfer existing strength and power to performance improves, and unilateral exercise may have a less significant role in improving stabilization.¹⁴ Spending more time on bilateral movements to increase overall strength appears to make sense for elite athletes. Of course, someone who has been competing for years may also have to balance their training to decrease the risk or irritation of injuries, so there is still a role in unilateral training from this perspective.

Takeaways

The biggest takeaway from what we have learned is that you should be cautious in prescribing unilateral exercises to adequately train the quads and hip stabilizers. Strength routines should include direct work for the hip stabilizers and the hamstrings, and coaches should not rely on unilateral exercises to achieve this. It does not appear, at least in this case, that these muscles would get enough stimuli to get proportionally stronger or hypertrophy at fast enough rates with the exercises we examined. An analogy would be doing biceps curls and expecting your shoulders, rotator cuffs, upper back, and chest to respond. Probably not that effective.

Strength routines should include direct work for the hip stabilizers and the hamstrings, and coaches should not rely on unilateral exercises to achieve this. Share on X

It’s important to remember that strength changes in individual muscles can also affect muscle coordination patterns, affecting force production. Coordination patterns can adapt, either positively or negatively, based on the force production capabilities of the muscles. However, our case study was just one individual, and we would expect that not everyone will have this specific result.

As with almost everything in life, moderation and variety keep the needle moving forward, so training your athlete’s newfound strength requires specific drills and lots of actual game play to complete the transfer. Starting with building overall strength and muscle development during the off-season with bilateral movements and focused work for the hip stabilizers establishes the foundation for more specific work with unilateral strength movements. Unilateral training also appears to be most relevant for those in the early stages of their athletic careers. Incorporating movement-specific drills and real-life performances should help complete the transfer as the season progresses.

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. Reilly, T., Morris, T., and Whyte, G. “The Specificity of Training Prescription and Physiological Assessment: A Review.” Journal of Sports Sciences. 2009;27(6):575–589.

2. Cronin, J., McNair, P.J., and Marshall, R.N. “Velocity Specificity, Combination Training and Sport Specific Tasks.” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2001;4(2):168–178.

3. Rejc, E., Lazzer, S., Antonutto, G., Isola, M., and di Prampero, P.E. “Bilateral Deficit and EMG Activity During Explosive Lower Limb Contractions Against Different Overloads.” European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2009,108(1),157–165.

4. Botton, C.E., Radaelli, R., Wilhelm, E.N., Rech, A., Brown, L.E., and Pinto, R.S. “Neuromuscular Adaptations to Unilateral Vs. Bilateral Strength Training in Women.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016;30(7):1924–1932.

5. Škarabot, J., Cronin, N., Strojnik, V., and Avela, J. “Bilateral Deficit in Maximal Force Production.” European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2016;116(11-12):2057–2084.

6. Bishop, C., Berney, J., Lake, J., et al. “Bilateral Deficit During Jumping Tasks: Relationship With Speed and Change of Direction Speed Performance.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019;35(7):1833–1840.

7. Nicholson, G. and Masini, D. “Bilateral Deficit: Relationships with Training History and Functional Performance.” Kinesiology. 2021;53(1):86–94.

8. Muyor, J.M., Martin-Fuentes, I., Rodriguez-Ridao, D., and Antequera-Vique, J.A. “Electromyographic Activity in the Gluteus Medius, Gluteus Maximus, Biceps Femoris, Vastus Lateralis, Vastus Medialis and Rectus Femoris During the Monopodal Squat, Forward Lunge and Lateral Step-Up Exercises.” PloS One. 2020,15(4),e0230841–e0230841.

9. McCurdy, K., O’Kelley, E., Kutz, M., Langford, G., Ernest, J., and Torres, M. “Comparison of Lower Extremity EMG Between the 2-Leg Squat and Modified Single-Leg Squat in Female Athletes.” Journal of Sport Rehabilitation. 2010;19(1):57–70.

10. Vigotsky, A.D., Halperin, I., Trajano, G.S., and Vieira, T.M. “Longing for a Longitudinal Proxy: Acutely Measured Surface EMG Amplitude Is Not a Validated Predictor of Muscle Hypertrophy.” Sports Medicine. 2022;52(2):193–199.

11. Vigotsky, A.D., Halperin, I., Lehman, G.J., Trajano, G.S., and Vieira, T.M. “Interpreting Signal Amplitudes in Surface Electromyography Studies in Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences.” Frontiers in Physiology. 2017;8:985.

12. Toor, A.S., Limpisvasti, O., Ihn, H.E., McGarry, M.H., Banffy, M., and Lee, T.Q. “The Significant Effect of the Medial Hamstrings on Dynamic Knee Stability.” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2018;27(8):2608–2616.

13. Bishop, C., Berney, J., Lake, J., Loturco, I., Blagrove, R., Turner, A., and Read, P. “Bilateral Deficit During Jumping Tasks: Relationship With Speed and Change of Direction Speed Performance.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019;35(7):1833–1844.

14. Moran, J., Ramirez-Campillo, R., Liew, B., et al. “Effects of Bilateral and Unilateral Resistance Training on Horizontally Orientated Movement Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Sports Medicine. 2020;51(2):225–242.

15. Wirth, K., Keiner, M., Szilvas, E., Hartmann, H., and Sander, A. “Effects of Eccentric Strength Training on Different Maximal Strength and Speed-Strength Parameters of the Lower Extremity.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2015;29(7):1837–1845.

16. Nicholson, G. and Masini, D. “Bilateral Deficit: Relationships with Training History and Functional Performance.” Kinesiology. 2021;53(1):86–94.

17. Brughelli, M., Cronin, J., Levin, G., and Chaouachi, A. “Understanding Change of Direction Ability in Sport: A Review of Resistance Training Studies.” Sports Medicine. 2008;38(12):1045–1063.

18. Bishop, C., Berney, J., Lake, J., et al. “Bilateral Deficit During Jumping Tasks: Relationship With Speed and Change of Direction Speed Performance.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019;35(7):1833–1840.

19. Lockie, R.G., Murphy, A.J., Schultz, A.B., Knight, T.J., and Janse de Jonge, X.A. “The Effects of Different Speed Training Protocols on Sprint Acceleration Kinematics and Muscle Strength and Power in Field Sport Athletes.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2012;26(6):1539–1550.

20. Hoffman, J.R., Ratamess, N.A., Klatt, M., Faigenbaum, A.D., and Kang, J. “Do Bilateral Power Deficits Influence Direction-Specific Movement Patterns?” Research in Sports Medicine. 2007;15(2):125–132.