Blog

There is an ever-increasing use of—and reliance on—data within sport. This primarily takes two forms:

1. Coaches and practitioners collecting and analyzing data to inform their decision-making processes.
2. Coaches and support staff using published (or even unpublished) research to guide their decisions.

This is largely a good thing. Being data-informed (as opposed to data-driven) often means that we can make better decisions, which in turn means that the athletes we work with perform better.

There is a dangerous flip side to this, however. As outlined in the now classic How to Lie with Statistics, we can often manipulate the numbers to support whichever message we desire. This is fine if we have the time and expertise to thoroughly vet the data we’re working with, but in today’s time-poor world, we’re often so rushed that we don’t have time to think—and unfortunately, critical thinking skills are in short supply.

Fortunately for us, Tim Harford of Undercover Economist and Cautionary Tales fame has written The Data Detective (published in Europe as How to Make the World Add Up). In this book, he strives to give us the confidence to use the information we gather to accurately scrutinize the world around us and make better decisions, while also escaping the flawed logic, cognitive biases, and emotions that poison our ability to think clearly. Harford does this through a number of key rules that, while designed for the real world, can be highly applicable to us in sport. Given the increased prevalence of data-derived and -informed approaches in sport, its publication could not have been timelier.

Search Your Feelings

In the Cautionary Tales episode “The Art Forger, the Nazi, and the Pope,” Harford tells us the story of Abraham Bredius. Bredius was a Dutch art collector and historian who was well established as an expert on the paintings of Johannes Vermeer; indeed, Bredius made his name in the 1880s by identifying works wrongly credited to Vermeer. Bredius was highly effective at spotting fake paintings, and in 1937, he published a book identifying 200 paintings incorrectly attributed to Rembrandt. Shortly afterward, Bredius was approached by a lawyer, who sought his opinion on a newly discovered painting called Christ at Emmaus, which was thought to be a Vermeer. Bredius had no doubts; he declared the painting the masterpiece of Vermeer, his best work ever.

Only, it wasn’t. The painting was a forgery, painted only a few months before. Bredius, however, wasn’t the only one who had been fooled; soon after he identified it as a Vermeer, the painting was purchased by a museum for the modern-day equivalent of £10 million. With the benefit of hindsight, art experts today can clearly see that Christ at Emmaus is not a Vermeer, but almost a century ago, Bredius—the pre-eminent art expert of his day—was easily fooled.

The key question to ask ourselves here is why? How can someone with so much expertise be so easily fooled? The answer, writes Harford, is because he almost wanted to be; he let his feelings get in the way of his analysis, making an impartial decision hard to come by.

The lesson here for all of us to heed is that when analyzing data or receiving information, we need to be wary of our current feelings and opinions on the subject at hand, says @craig100m. Share on X

The lesson here for all of us to heed is that when analyzing data or receiving information, we need to be wary of our current feelings and opinions on the subject at hand. Harford writes “we often find ways to dismiss evidence we don’t like. And the opposite is true, too.” This is something termed motivated reasoning; a phenomenon where we use emotionally biased reasoning to make the decision we most desire, as opposed to that which is supported by the evidence. In essence, we believe what we want to believe.

I’ve made this mistake myself. When I was doing bobsled, a common training and testing method was to push a roll-bob—a metal frame on wheels—over a set distance, comprised of a run-in and a timed 30-meter section. One day, training at Loughborough, I broke all the existing national push records, which made me wonder whether I had measured the run-in distance correctly. In my head, there were two competing explanations for my performance:

1. I was in very good shape.
2. I had measured the distance incorrectly.

I went with the former because it’s what I wanted to believe. Sadly, I was wrong—instead of the 10-meter run-in distance, I had actually set it up for 15 meters.

Harford suggests that it isn’t necessary to become an emotionless processor of the information we receive, but merely acknowledge the role emotions play in how we understand and filter the information and take it into account when making our decisions. When I hold an opinion, I often ask myself “what information would I need to see to make me change my mind?” Asking myself this before I get the information sets a target, and if that target is hit, I have to update my viewpoint. This doesn’t always mean that I change my mind, but perhaps I hold a given opinion less strongly or search for more information that might make me better informed.

And so, to Harford’s first key point—when presented with a new piece of information:

• Stop and think.
• Examine your emotions.
• Notice if you’re straining toward a particular conclusion.

Ponder Your Personal Experience

Visualization is a common technique utilized by many athletes as a way of practicing performance. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated that across a number of studies exploring its effectiveness, visualization and practice enhanced performance to a greater extent than practice alone. Similar research was around when I was an athlete, so I started to utilize formal visualization training, setting aside a time each day to do so.

For me, it didn’t work—it just became another thing to add to the to-do list, and I found it really hard to get a positive outcome from the time I was spending.

Here, what I was experiencing as an individual was contrasting with what the research suggested I should experience.

This leads us to Harford’s second rule: we need to consider whether the information we’re receiving correlates with our personal experiences, and if it doesn’t, we can explore the underlying data more closely. It’s clear to see how this could be the case in sport; we collect a lot of data related to wellness, for example. Some of this data suggest that the athlete is in a state where they can train and perform optimally, but as the coach, we can see that they are struggling. We might find it hard to quantify why we feel this.

Potentially, it’s something in the way they’re moving in their warm-up, their overall mood and affect, or something they’ve said. This is the value of the coach’s eye, whereby we gain inherent knowledge through years of experience, allowing us to identify patterns and make decisions. This is in line with Harford’s suggestion: when our experiences don’t correlate with the data, we need to look for the underlying reasons why.

This becomes increasingly important when we consider Goodhart’s Law, which states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.

Again, I have plenty of examples of this from my own career. In 2010, I became increasingly concerned that my performances were beginning to regress, so I started to carry out much more testing within training. I insisted on using timing gates for everything and measuring bar speed in my major lifts. My belief was that if I performed well in these tests, I’d perform well on the track. I did perform well in these training tests. I did not perform well on the track, having my worst season since I was 17. And this wasn’t all that unexpected based on how I had been feeling; training was a struggle, and I was increasingly fatigued.

Had I placed more weight on my feelings than on the data, perhaps I’d have had more easy days and been more recovered. The flip of this is also true—many times before a personal best performance, I’ve had a bad training session which has been reflected in my testing data. Rather than focus on the measure, I was instead able to focus on my feelings and experience; I knew I was in good overall shape, so I wasn’t too concerned. The key point here is that any data we collect, outside of actual competition performance, is just a proxy—and so we should consider it as such.

The key point is that any data we collect, outside of actual competition performance, is just a proxy—and so we should consider it as such, says @craig100m. Share on X

If we understand the statistics, we actually understand little; we need to be curious about what we experience in the real world as opposed to just on a spreadsheet. Or, as Harford puts it, we need to combine the “bird’s-eye view” of data with the “worm’s-eye view” of experience.

Avoid Premature Enumeration

When we receive a piece of data, it’s crucial that we ask ourselves what it actually means. In my training data example, I was conflating performance in a single test of a single performance aspect with competition performance, which isn’t the case at all.

This becomes increasingly important when we work with data that could be considered binary. Take sports injuries as an example: either you’re injured or you’re not. But we can define “injury” differently. If I have a niggle that is affecting, but not stopping, my ability to train, I might not consider myself injured, while another athlete would.

This becomes important when we’re interpreting injury data between two athletes, training groups, or sporting teams: have they all defined the outcome in the same way or is there ambiguity in a given term? Similarly, the word injury is vague: an athlete who misses a day’s worth of training with a sore foot and an athlete who misses a whole year following surgery could both be said to have experienced an injury—but the magnitude of the differences is huge.

Harford terms this premature enumeration—where we rush to use numbers (or information) before we really understand what it’s supposed to mean. In the increasingly complex world of elite sport, it can often be difficult not just to quantify what is happening, but also to define it—paying attention to both things will make us better able to utilize the data we’re provided with.

Step Back and Enjoy the View

If we collected sprint testing data every training session, we would see a lot of variation between sessions. This could be linked to a variety of aspects: accumulated fatigue, normal daily variation, the presence of training partners, motivation on a given day—the list goes on. Within a given training block—such as a week—we might see a general trend emerging; perhaps we are getting faster or slower.

Regular collection of data encourages us to focus on micro-trends; we become fixated on what we’ve achieved that week. Sometimes, it might be better to take a longer view. If we view our sprint testing data over a year period, the trend is much less sensitive to small, day-to-day variations, giving us a truer overall sense of where we are. If our sprint time is typically tracking downward over this extended period, the training we’re doing is effective. As such, being able to take a step back and view the data collected within the overall context in which we’re operating (which, in athletics, is yearly seasons) likely yields more informative insights.

It’s easy to become hyper-focused on a single metric or a short time period, but sports performance is a long game, and viewing things through this lens enables better decisions to be made. Share on X

Upon getting information or data, Harford suggests taking a step back, adopting a wider lens of analysis, and attempting to put the information in the context of the bigger picture. It’s easy to become hyper-focused on a single metric or a short time period, but sports performance is a long game, and viewing things through this lens enables better decisions to be made.

Get the Back Story

If you toss a fair, standard coin, there is a 1 in 1,024 chance of getting 10 heads in a row. Here’s a video of Derren Brown, the British illusionist, achieving it. This isn’t a trick, per se; Brown does actually achieve the 10 consecutive heads from 10 tosses—it’s just that it took him nine hours of continuous coin tosses to achieve this run of 10. This is an important point: things that have a low probability can happen when you carry out the action many times. Something that has a one in a million probability of occurring likely will happen at some point during a million attempts.

Remembering this is very important when it comes to placing the results of scientific studies into context. I’ve written about this before, when I explored p-hacking and HARKing as drivers of the replication crisis. As a massive oversimplification, scientific researchers often use something called a p-value to determine whether a result is significant or not. What the p-value tells us is the probability of achieving a result this extreme and the null hypothesis being true—essentially, the probability of saying there is an effect when there isn’t.

The typical p-value cut off is 0.05, which means that if p = 0.05, there is a 5% chance of us getting the results we see and there actually being no effect. For any individual study, this is quite a low threshold, but 5% represents a 1 in 20 chance. That means that, for 20 studies in a given area, we would expect one study to report an effect being present when there actually isn’t one.

This is generally fine when there are lots of studies on a given topic; we can look at the overall literature base, see what most studies find, and then make up our minds. It becomes more of an issue when there are fewer studies in this area. If there are only two studies, with conflicting results, it can be hard to understand which study is “correct.”

This becomes even more of an issue when publication bias comes into play. Publication bias is where studies that report an effect are much more likely to be published than those that report no effect. This is problematic, because if we have 20 studies, 19 showing no effect, and 1 showing an effect, the 1 showing an effect may well be published, while the others wouldn’t be.

Harford presents an example that demonstrates the ridiculousness of this situation. In 2011, esteemed psychologist Daryl Bem published a paper that demonstrated humans could predict the future. This is very interesting but also highly implausible; you and I both know that humans cannot predict the future. Bem’s methods were replicated in other studies, all of which failed to demonstrate evidence for humans being able to predict the future.

However, the journal that published the original research refused to publish these studies, stating that it did not publish replications. There is no suggestion that Bem fabricated his results, merely that his findings were chance occurrences that we would expect to happen less than 5% of the time—but, of course, if you refuse to publish what normally happens, what happens 5% of the time looks true!

Ask Who Is Missing

One of the first articles I ever wrote, back in 2015, was on understanding sports science for coaches and trainers. In that article, I wrote “the results of a study are only applicable to the type of people recruited to the study.” A common goal of research is to find results that are generalizable: if we take the intervention used in a given study and apply it to the broader population, do we get the same results?

Within sports science, this is a bit trickier. Arguably, we don’t want generalizable results, because we don’t work with the general population—we work with elite athletes. Such athletes, by their very definition, are rare, and this creates a problem for sports science researchers: how do you convince an elite athlete to try something that might not make them better, just for your study? This is obviously very difficult (I speak from experience), which is why most sports performance research is either observational in nature, or if interventions are utilized, the participants are often either university students or recreational or sub-elite athletes. This is important to keep in mind when evaluating information—are the participants in the research you’re utilizing similar to the ones you’re working with?

This is important to keep in mind when evaluating information—are the participants in the research you’re utilizing similar to the ones you’re working with?, says @craig100m. Share on X

This is even more of an issue if you coach women. A 2019 paper identified that fewer than 20% of all sports science research papers included any female participants and fewer than 5% were comprised exclusively of females. Again, this causes us issues in taking the results of a given study into practice, because men and women are vastly different.

This is why Harford’s sixth rule—ask who is missing—is especially important within the sports performance research sphere, because the answer could well be the very people we’re most interested in. This doesn’t mean we have to discard all sports performance research, but as discussed above, we use science, and scientific research, as a method of informing our practice; it’s a starting point from which we experiment and adapt, as opposed to the answer to all our questions.

Demand Transparency When the Computer Says “No”

We live in the era of big data, and we use progressively more complex methods of analyzing this data to get answers that inform our decisions. An increasingly common approach is the use of machine learning, where we “teach” a computer to provide answers based on the information we put in. This creates an issue: we often get answers, but we don’t understand why the computer came up with these answers—which makes it very difficult for us to spot when a mistake has been made.

A great example of this comes from when researchers taught a machine learning model to differentiate between dogs and wolves in photographs. To do this, researchers show the computer a picture of either animal, allow it to guess, and then tell it whether it is right or wrong. Over time, the computer “learns” how to differentiate dogs from wolves.

In this case, the researchers could reverse-engineer how the computer was deciding between dog and wolf: if the picture had a white background (i.e., snow), the computer labelled the animal as a wolf; if it didn’t, it labelled it as a dog. This is a clever way of the computer being able to distinguish between dog and wolf when presented with photographs, but it’s obviously not very useful in the real world—the solution the computer comes up with is not broadly applicable, because what it has “learned” is essentially to cheat.

This is becoming an increasingly big problem in sports performance due to the use of “black box” algorithms in proprietary equipment/software, such as those that measure training load. As companies develop products that promise to predict certain outcomes, they naturally want to protect their invention—as such, they don’t let us know how their models come up with a given answer, or why. This means we can’t evaluate them for ourselves; we must either blindly trust the machine or ignore it.

For reasonably mundane decisions, such as whether an athlete should train today or not, that’s mostly fine—but you can see how this could become an issue when it comes to selection. How can you explain to a player why they’re not selected if you don’t understand it yourself? What if the computer is wrong?

This is the crux of Harford’s seventh rule: do not simply trust that algorithms do a better job than humans. But similarly, also recognize that humans have their own biases and mental shortcuts—just because an algorithm is flawed doesn’t mean a human would do better. The key here is to strike a middle ground—understand that both computers and humans have bias, keep an open mind, and try to critically appraise all information you receive before acting on it.

Remember That Misinformation Can Be Beautiful Too

One of my favorite books is Information is Beautiful, by the graphic journalist David McCandless. As per the title, information can be beautiful—but so can misinformation. A cleverly designed infographic or catchy framing of a piece of information can draw us in, even if the underlying data and facts are not accurate or are being misrepresented. The ease of sharing this information and infographics on social media, in turn, allows this misinformation or incorrect information to spread, and before we know it, the wrong message is being accepted.

A cleverly designed infographic or catchy framing of a piece of information can draw us in, even if the underlying data and facts are not accurate or are being misrepresented, says @craig100m. Share on X

Harford has some key guidelines for us to keep in mind when it comes to interpreting beautiful visualizations:

1. Check our emotions: A well-designed graphic can invoke an emotional response, so acknowledging and being aware of this is crucial in our interpretation of what we’re seeing.
2. Check we understand what the infographic purports to show. Is context being given? Can you access the source data?
3. While it isn’t the case with many of the infographics used from those in sports performance, we must consider that someone might be trying to persuade us to think in a certain way, and given their meme-like qualities, infographics are almost uniquely effective at doing this. 

Keep an Open Mind

Changing our mind is uncomfortable, particularly if we have forcibly set out our stall (declared our intention) previously. But the best thinkers update their beliefs based on the evidence—academic and real world—that they receive. This links into the work of Phil Tetlock, popularized in Superforecasting (which is a High Performance Library topic for another day).

Tetlock’s research suggests there are two key types of people: hedgehogs and foxes. Hedgehogs typically have one big idea, which they use to explain the world around them. They are a specialist in that area of knowledge, are very confident in their predictions, don’t consider counterarguments, and don’t like to change their predictions once made. Foxes, on the other hand, tend to be multidisciplinary thinkers. They have broad knowledge of different areas, and they are more open to criticism or alternative views, more cautious in their predictions, and more likely to update their predictions as they get more information.

Harford writes that very often we make mistakes not because the information we need is not available, but because we refuse to change our mind based on this information, says @craig100m. Share on X

Foxes are much better at making predictions about the future because they’re consistently updating their mental model of the world as they receive new information. Being willing to change our mind, ultimately, makes us better thinkers. In summing up this chapter, Harford writes that very often we make mistakes not because the information we need is not available, but because we refuse to change our mind based on this information.

The Golden Rule – Be Curious

Harford’s final rule, the one that supersedes all his other “commandments,” is the golden one: Be curious. Look deeper and ask questions; undertake active inquiry as opposed to blind acceptance; seek out wider sources of information.

By following the key rules outlined by Harford in The Data Detective, we can all become more informed consumers of information and data, allowing us to make better-informed decisions to support the performance of the athletes and teams we work with. Given the abundance of information out there today, these are important lessons—and something we should all aim to get better at.

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

Coaching speed can seem like a complex task: the act of sprinting involves more muscular activation and mental stimulation than most exercises, and this is even before considering the tactile involvement of evasion and change of direction required by field-based sport athletes. To sprint optimally, the body needs to be in sync with the mind and both must be operating on all cylinders. With this heightened level of movement, it requires more than just the typical verbal or visual cue to get your message across. Speed needs to be developed primarily through tactile learning and performing.

Coaching sprinting and speed movements to younger athletes—those who have yet to fully develop mentally or physically—is a different challenge as well. Physically, the process is highly dependent on where the athlete is in terms of puberty and where they lie on the PHV chart. This will affect whether their nervous systems are even prepared to deliver the high-power outputs needed to run fast. Regardless, working with youth athletes is a wonderful opportunity because they should be exposed to general athletic movement patterns such as sprinting, jumping, skipping, throwing, change of direction movements, and more on a consistent basis.

So, while you may not be able to create the next junior Olympian, you can give the athlete a better chance of reaching their full athletic potential when the time does come.

The Building Blocks of Speed

There is no such thing as “perfect running mechanics”: coaching speed is not a one-size-fits-all scenario. As coaches, we need to stop putting athletes in boxes and labeling them with no apparent strategy in mind. We cannot create robots who only function under perfect conditions while we (and they) analyze every aspect of their movement.

There is no such thing as ‘perfect running mechanics’—coaching speed is not a one-size-fits-all scenario. Share on X

I have actually trained some of these types of robots—kids who were taught there is only one way to run and only one way to jump and land, and anything else is wrong. I also can honestly say that those kids did not win many races or games, especially those involving multidirectional movement, deceleration, and quick thinking.

I do, however, believe we should equip our athletes with the building blocks to successfully develop their speed. Traits such as relative body strength, coordination, rhythm, and timing should be a priority during this early development. We should also help set them up for success by putting them in movements and situations where they can get the most out of their training and see positive outcomes: movements they can navigate on their own, easy tasks given by their coaches, and tactile cues that help get those messages delivered (while also being fun!).

Video 1. The medicine ball punch run fits the above description perfectly. While the objective of the movement is to improve frontside running mechanics, you don’t have mention this to the athletes.

In the medicine ball punch run, simply explain to the athletes that they’re going to hold the medicine ball at their belly button and sprint down the field with the intent to have their knees driving toward the medicine ball.

Leave it at that, and then base the next step on how they perform the drill in real time.

As coaches, don’t go into a movement expecting an athlete to succeed or fail and don’t mention the difficulty beforehand. This is something I had to learn the hard way, as I would talk about how we were going to be doing a difficult movement before showing it. That put negative, preconceived thoughts into the athletes’ minds that it was going to be hard, and few had success. Now, I just teach those same movements and let the athletes find out on their own, which has resulted in a much higher success rate and less hesitation to perform.

As coaches, don’t go into a movement expecting an athlete to succeed or fail and don’t mention the difficulty beforehand. Share on X

Youth athletes don’t particularly care about the why of their training if that why is being defined with an anatomy textbook. It is important to provide logic and information instead, so you establish that you understand what you’re speaking about while explaining things in language they understand.

So, if you want an athlete to come out in a better position for acceleration, don’t tell them to come out of their sprint position at a 45-degree angle with their chin tucked while focusing on effective forward propulsion. Instead, I would say something simple like “explode out of your starting position like an arrow being shot out of a bow.” Then I would set them up in a drill such as a push-up or falling start where they would achieve the body positions that I’m preaching about with little to no difficulty.

Videos 2 & 3. For athletes working on better acceleration positions, in addition to cueing in terms they understand, I set them up in a drill such as a push-up or falling start. This ensures they achieve the body positions that I’m preaching about with little to no difficulty.

Over the years, I’ve discovered that the less I say during coaching, the better my athletes seem to do. Along with increasing my listening and observation of the athlete’s movements, I have made my coaching cues simpler, more direct, and delivered in a manner that’s appropriate to my audience. Limiting the noise and focusing on what is most important should be the first step when coaching the youth athlete. These kids are usually clouded in their minds already and adding to that is just going to make your job more difficult.

Limiting the noise and focusing on what is most important should be the first step when coaching the youth athlete. These kids are usually clouded in their minds already. Share on X

Communication via Cueing

If you’ve ever sprinted as hard as physically possible, you know how the world begins to close in around you. You can’t hear anything and are unable to make anything out visually other than the final target.

Now, imagine running as hard as physically possible and having someone screaming at you—screaming multiple complex motor tasks for you to fix while you’re sprinting at full speed.

KNEES UP! TORSO UPRIGHT! ARMS AT 90 DEGREES! CHIN TUCKED!

How do you think that would affect your results and end goal? Most likely, this added noise would create an increase in anxiety and doubt. Screaming more cues at our athletes leads to the opposite of success for the task they are trying to complete. The less we say, the more our message can be heard.

Instead, build this highly complex task of speed and sprinting by presenting information in chunks or using a block system of learning. Pick one aspect of sprinting for that session and execute movements to help enhance that single aspect. For example, if we decide to work on the starting position of the sprint, then we would specifically put our athletes in situations and movements to enhance aspects of the starting position (such as obtaining a positive shin angle and optimal push-off of the starting line).

Videos 4 & 5. Starting positions such as a deep bend or half kneeling position will help enhance the athlete’s abilities to obtain the shin angle we are cueing, and the athletes can also feel it. I always tell them to really exaggerate these starts because if they can successfully perform them, imagine how easy sprinting out of a standard two-point starting position will be!

Athletes in field-based sports—or sports that require them to perceive and read information rapidly, gather information about defenders, recognize where they are in space, and so much more—must constantly be playing that sport and be exposed to situational-based learning scenarios. This can also be presented in a block system.

When the athlete just needs to focus on one specific task, they can excel more at that single element. This method of learning is effective with kids because they are not being pulled in several different directions. Youth athletes are like sponges: they soak up information that we present to them; we just have to do so in a manner that allows them to get it. Also, many of the aspects of speed and sprinting are dependent upon one another. If an athlete doesn’t understand or can’t even get into an effective starting position to lead into a sprint, then why would other aspects such as arm mechanics matter?

Youth athletes are like sponges: they soak up information that we present to them; we just have to do so in a manner that allows them to get it. Share on X

Once a particular block of movement has been covered, when that movement is revisited, it is an easier and faster process for the athlete to review. Categorizing these blocks or clumps of information for sprinting will allow you to begin laying out a more manageable training structure.

Structuring a Program

Training will be dependent upon several variables—such as the length and time of the training as well as the current abilities of the athletes you have—but even so, training will follow a similar layout to allow clearer, more focused goals and teaching progressions.

The four sections of a training program we use are:

1. Preparation.
2. Technical movements.
3. Application movements.
4. Games.

1. Preparation
The preparation section should be structured loosely to allow freedom of several different movement patterns. If there is a highly specific day of training with a more experienced athlete, then you can begin incorporating more specific movements to meet the muscle action and needs of the session.

Video 6. Movements such as various skips, hops, crawls, rolls, and throws can be part of this preparation section.

2. Technical Movements

These movements are used to enhance the main focus or application of that session—they don’t refer to technical as being directly tied to running mechanics per se, but movements to better set up the athlete for that day.

Video 7. Applying drills that emphasize the session’s primary focus helps the athletes recognize how all speed training can be interconnected.

An example would be utilizing the lateral load and lift drill above before coaching athletes to do a speed movement involving curved running. Both involve force being produced through the outside edge of the foot and will put the body into particular positions involving aggressive knee angles. This first drill will help the athlete better feel the movement in a more controlled, stationary movement. Doing this helps with the cues because the athletes now feel what they are attempting to accomplish before they work to apply it.

Video 8. The forward low walk forces the knee to continuously roll into positive shin angles as the athlete walks down the field.

Another example of a technical movement would be utilizing the forward low walk (above) when working to develop acceleration. This would be a good movement to pair with the deep knee bend or half kneeling start sprints mentioned previously.

3. Application Movements

These movements are where we are trying to get the most bang for our buck by focusing on a single, specific task. This is where we implement the movements to set our athletes up for success: movements where they don’t have to think about execution, and where we almost trick them into doing it with limited cueing.

Using these movements accomplishes a great deal. It allows for a high success rate of performing the movement, as well as a high transfer rate. At the end of the day, we don’t want the athletes to get better at drills, we want them to get faster to increase their potential for sport…and have fun doing it!

Video 9. If the lateral wall drill was used to enhance the athlete’s abilities for the day, we would then want to utilize an application drill for the athletes to apply, like curve running. 

4. Games

The final portion of the session is going for a more realistic and competitive application through participation in games. Coach Nick DiMarco from Elon University has popularized these games throughout training by breaking them into categories to fit certain goals:

• Chase.
• Mirror.
• Dodge.
• Score.

Each category has its own unique objective for the athletes to excel. When getting kids to compete in these games, I have seen athletes who had previously shown little to no ability or enthusiasm during the session completely crush everyone during the game.

When athletes compete during the games, it requires no cueing whatsoever. This is their time to take the wheel and do what makes them most successful. As coaches, we should place our athletes in the appropriate situations to get the most out of them, whether this be by adding constraints to the games to make it more challenging for athletes who seem to have little struggle or to tip the scale in the favor of those athletes who can’t otherwise manage to win. We’re not just going to give them the victory but create a situation in which success is at least actually possible.

Videos 10-12. Multidirectional chase, 2v1 chase, and flag “wrestling” are examples of chase and dodge games.

Making It All Work

A couple of examples of full-speed sessions are:

1. Multidirectional-Focused Speed Session

Preparation:

Technical Drill: Lateral wall drill load and lift 2-3×5 each

Application Drill: S-curve sprints 4-6x 15-20 yards

Games: Multidirectional chase

2. Acceleration-Focused Speed Session

Preparation:

Technical Drill: Low forward walks 2-3×10-20 yards

Application Drill: Deep knee bend sprints 4-6x 10 yards

Games: 2v1 Chase (any linear chase drill)

Coaching youth athletes through a speed session should not only be a fun experience for them, but for you as well. Share on X

Coaching youth athletes through a speed session should not only be a fun experience for them, but for you as well. We must set our athletes up in movements and in a system where they can be successful, in which coaching is direct, simple, and done in an appropriate manner for the kids to comprehend. Feeling and performing will always trump the chalkboard talks, and while everything has its place when attention spans are fading, we have to communicate quickly and effectively to have more engaging, meaningful, and fun sessions!

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

Coaching is the ultimate problem-solving activity. Each athlete is their own unique puzzle, but none is a standalone if the athlete is part of a team. Some puzzles are simple—the colors and patterns make it easy to see which pieces go together. Others are extremely complex, littered with shades of gray and chaotic patterns. To further add to this difficulty, we are dealing people, not stiff pieces of cardboard, so what happens when you feel you have pieces that should go together but they don’t quite fuse? What steps can you take to link physical output in training with physical performance in competition?

In the first part of this series, I outlined the new approach I used for our jumpers at Homewood-Flossmoor High School during the unique 2021 track and field season. Five drills were presented in detail, and links to additional drills addressed in previous articles were given.

Due to a shorter season length and a higher percentage of athletes being new to the jumping events, I decided to increase the frequency of these drills during “pre-practice” sessions—planning these two to three times per week with the hope of fast-tracking the learning curve of our athletes. The drills each athlete would complete were assigned individually, based primarily on what I found to be the most significant gaps in their technique. While it is the norm for athletes to improve upon their performances over the course of the season, I felt a portion of their improvement was due to what was being addressed by the drills—in other words, the specific part of a jump addressed by the drill was transferring to a full jump when it was performed.

If the appropriate drills are chosen for an athlete, improvements can occur, even if they are several generations removed from the actual event, says @HFJumps. Share on X

I would like to reiterate that I feel the most valuable learning occurs when athletes improve in activities that are as few generations (if any) as possible removed from the actual event. However, if the appropriate drills are chosen for an athlete, improvements can occur, even if they are seven generations removed. In this article, I will lay out the drills chosen for a specific athlete: while the previous piece addressed the why, what, and how of those drills in terms of the entire jumps crew, this post will take a similar approach but narrow it down to a single athlete.

Background

The athlete in question—Jamar McMillian—was a senior in 2021. During his four years in our program, he always tested well in comparison to his peers:

• • From 2018-2021, Jamar was always in the top 10 in our program (100+ athletes) in the countermovement jump (with arms). His best jump was 35.5 inches (via a Just Jump Mat).
  • In 2020 and 2021, one of our fun “sprinter challenges” was to see who could obtain the highest peak power utilizing a 1080 Sprint. Jamar was almost always at the top of this competition.
  • For the strength crowd, Jamar could deadlift more than three times his body weight. His isometric belt squat (crane scale) was almost twice as much as our other jumpers.

Although many of these numbers indicate an opportunity for elite performance at the high school level, I struggled to get Jamar’s ability to shine through in the jumping events. He was always a significant contributor, but his performances in competition did not match the outputs he had during testing. His bests of 1.11, 1.06, and 1.03 during his freshman through junior years correlate with an ability to jump well over 20 feet, which did not happen. Here is his four-year long jump progression:

• Jamar started off the 2021 season strong, with a 19-9.75 on a chilly day (April 24). While he continued to progress, I was not convinced that he could be a state qualifier in long jump (22-2) until May 15, when he jumped 21-5.75 in wet, mid-50° F conditions. He continued to participate in long and triple jump through our conference meet, as I was hopeful for a big PR in triple. Unfortunately, that did not transpire, but sometimes having it all means not having it all at once!

After conference, we decided not to pursue triple jump any further. Jamar’s individual physical plan was divided into two categories: gait correction and take-off correction. I will not discuss the items that were only specific to triple jump.

Gait Correction

Most of a jump attempt occurs on the runway, and if an athlete is not maximizing their ability through quality acceleration and upright mechanics, they will hit a false ceiling in the actual jump. Jamar was a tough case to crack. As seen in the video below, his feet rotate externally prior to ground contact.

Video 1. While slight external rotation is common in sprinters, in Jamar’s case it was definitely excessive. Chris Korfist used the analogy of his feet looking like oars turning over in water. This video was taken in the summer of 2020.

Before getting into specifics, I should point out that the gait correction strategies I use are highly influenced by Chris Korfist. Living in the Chicago area has allowed me to see him present more than 40 times, through Track Football Consortium, Reflexive Performance Reset, and ITCCCA.

I have also made numerous trips to his legendary basement: in 2020 (Jamar’s junior year), Chris became a part of our track and field staff, which made every day a learning experience. His ability to see issues in sprinting in real time and create correction measures is incredible.

Gait Correction #1: Ankle Rocker

During Jamar’s freshman and sophomore years, one item given to him for “homework” were ankle rocker exercises. Ankle rockers are where the shank rotates forward, resulting in dorsiflexion to help propel the body forward. Dr. Shawn Allen of The Gait Guys gives six compensation patterns for people who are unable to reach the needed amount of ankle rocker in this video. Jamar’s compensation was the second compensation addressed (external rotation of the foot).

The main exercises given to Jamar were ankle rocker shuffle and moonwalks, ankle rocker single leg squats, and ankle rocker jumps. Unfortunately, despite thousands of repetitions, this did not solve the issue of excessive external rotation of the foot prior to contact.

Gait Correction #2: Low Lunge Walks

Fast forward to Jamar’s junior year. Chris Korfist was now on our staff, and we began the season with A LOT of time devoted to low lunge walks. I have sung the praises of this exercise in multiple pieces, and I’m going to do it again. The benefit of this drill is that it takes the athlete through all four phases of rocker (heel, ankle, forefoot, toe) in gait. I truly believe this was the missing link for Jamar.

A common thought here would be: Was all the time spent on ankle rocker his first two seasons a waste? Could one just fast forward to this exercise? My assumption is that the ankle rocker work set the table for him being able to transfer the low lunge work to his running gait. So, it definitely was not a waste. That being said, if I could hop into a DeLorean with a flux capacitor, I would have Jamar perform ankle rocker exercises and low lunge walks concurrently.

If you watch an athlete perform the low lunge walk, the way they initiate and lose contact with the ground is the same way they do it in running gait. It tells the story before the story is told. Share on X

Another side note of the low lunge walk: If you watch an athlete perform the exercise, the way they initiate and lose contact with the ground is the same way they do it in running gait. It tells the story before the story is told. I am still waiting for a case where this is not true. This exercise has been an absolute game-changer in gait assessment and correction.

Gait Correction #3: Spring Ankle

Chris Korfist and Cal Dietz partnered to create the Triphasic Speed Training Manual, and a big part of it was what they termed the “spring ankle model.” The lower leg and foot are often overlooked in training, which is probably the strangest aspect of sport training since almost all locomotion is formed from the foot contacting the ground. The spring ankle model involves yielding isometrics, which can eventually progress into overcoming isometrics and other variations. The goal is to get the foot and ankle to be able to handle the forces generated from the whip of the hip. For Jamar, an additional benefit was to get his brain comfortable with the position of pressure on the ball of the big toe without excessive external rotation.

As a side note, I think overcoming isometrics are a training menu item that should be used with care due to their high intensity. However, I feel that the foot and ankle being able to handle load is so important that I would be comfortable using the spring-ankle exercises in an overcoming isometric style with most populations after time spent in the yielding style.

Gait Correction #4: Wickets with Arms Across the Chest

Many coaches use wickets to help improve running technique. A subset uses wickets with various arm positions. Another subset is able to dial in those variations based upon what the athlete presents in gait.

Because the arms act as a counterbalance, we eliminated them (arms across the chest) during wickets to present a greater challenge to the foot, says @HFJumps. Share on X

Jamar received a steady diet of “hugs” (arms across the chest) during wickets and other plyometric type activities. The reason he was given this specific variation was that by eliminating the arms, a greater challenge is presented to the foot. This is because the arms act as a counterbalance. When the athlete is at toe-off on the right foot, the left arm is back and the right arm is forward, making it easier for the right foot to roll through to the ball of the big toe. Taking away the counterbalance poses a more difficult task for where the issue lies.

Video 2. While different arm positions can be used for all athletes, knowing the why behind them makes them even more valuable.

Gait Correction #5: Exer-Genie with Diagonal Resistance

A by-product of Jamar’s excessive external rotation was periodic toe-offs where he would exit the ground off the fourth and fifth toes as opposed to the first and second. To assist with this “finishing ability” to go along with his improvement in not externally rotating the foot as much, we added exercises (sprints and bounding complexes) with diagonal resistance. This was stolen from Chris Meng via a Track-Football Consortium question and answer.

I really like this variation because it begins with a huge amount of lateral resistance on the left foot. As Jamar gets further away from the Exer-Genie, the lateral load becomes biased to sagittal. The enhanced load puts him into the pattern we are looking for, and then he is able to maintain that pattern in a more realistic setting.

Video 3. The exercise becomes more “realistic” the further he goes.

Gait Correction #6: 1080 Sprint Assistance

Seeing Chris Korfist present and working with him has caused me to view assisted sprints and jump complexes as more of a technical correction tool as opposed to just a training stimulus. Simply put, the assistance causes the body to move faster, which makes the brain feel threatened and have a desire to get the foot on the ground as soon and as safely as possible.

The result for Jamar?

Not enough time to externally rotate the foot prior to contact. This can be seen in the video below during a bound complex (it should be noted that I hypothesize this was even more effective because of all the foundational items mentioned above). Video 5 shows the same exercise with resistance. I included it because it shows that even when Jamar did not feel threatened, external rotation was small. For clarity, while watching videos 4 and 5, focus on the leg interacting with the ground.

Video 4. Assisted bound complex using the 1080 Sprint.

Video 5. Resisted bound complex using the 1080 Sprint.

By the end of the 2021 season, Jamar looked like a different runner—still room for improvement, of course, but much more efficient overall. Here is a video of him during the last few weeks of the season, running in socks. What sticks out to me compared to the 2020 video is his reactivity off the ground.

Video 6. Jamar from the front near the end of the 2021 season.

Take-Off Correction: Anti-Penultimate Box

The anti-penultimate box drill was discussed in the previous article, and it was one Jamar completed multiple times per week. Jamar’s biggest issue in the actual jumping part of long jump had always been too low of a take-off angle. Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to get quality and consistent jump video at a high school track competition; however, I think the videos below show his improvement in this regard.

Positive change is rarely due to one component, and there are certainly many factors which led to huge improvement for Jamar. Improved sprint speed and sprint technique and an increase in strength certainly played a big role. So did his flight style (free leg extending down instead of forward—a product of thousands of gallops and run-run-jumps). Furthermore, his landing improved because his flight improved because his take-off improved because he was more efficient on the runway. All this being said, I do think that the anti-penultimate box drill allowed him to dial in the feeling of what needed to happen to project himself into the air.

Video 7. Jamar long jumping in 2018.

Video 8: Jamar long jumping in 2021.

Additional Parts of the Equation

Reflexive Performance Reset (RPR): In the fall of 2019, I was invited to preview the beta version of RPR Level 3 Training. My partner was Neuqua Valley’s brilliant head coach, Mike Kennedy. When we were instructed on “the back 5,” Mike mentioned that he felt this method helped Neuqua’s jumpers’ performances skyrocket in 2018. I witnessed this incredible improvement firsthand as Neuqua’s jumpers performed incredibly well down the stretch and were a big reason why they edged us 52-48 in the 2018 state team competition.

Jamar had back issues throughout his career, and toward the end of this past season, they started to flare up again. I had a flashback in a dream of Mike telling me about “the back five,” and we started implementing those specific tests and reset techniques into Jamar’s plan. As so often is the case with RPR, Jamar felt a big difference (his phrase was “I feel like a new man”).

RPR is often a hot topic for debate in the social media world, but at the end of the day, I will take an athlete who feels “like a new man” on the runway over one who feels like an old man every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Whether it is correlation or causation that Jamar’s best jumps happened once we started this could be debated and ultimately never settled, but it certainly did not hurt!

Whether it is correlation or causation that Jamar’s best jumps happened once we started RPR could be debated and ultimately never settled, but it certainly did not hurt, says @HFJumps. Share on X

It would also be wrong of me to not include the fantastic job our athletic training staff (Brad Kleine and Danni Werner) did with Jamar. A basketball player can be 80% and still put up 30 points. In many cases, a track and field athlete at 80% might as well be at 2%. It often takes a village to help get an athlete to the finish line, and we are very fortunate to have a great village!

Maturity: One of the best parts about coaching track and field is that I am able to coach athletes for their entire high school track career. It is extremely rewarding to witness the growth athletes undergo, not only as athletes, but even more so as people. Jamar was always a dedicated athlete. When given specific “homework,” I could trust that he would do it. When given a task to complete during practice that I may not have been able to oversee because I had to work with high jumpers, I was always confident that Jamar would take care of business.

Jamar’s dedication to his craft allowed me to navigate what was and was not working with his training. The truth is, during his four years, I had more misses than makes in his programming, but because I could trust his adherence to the program, it allowed me to identify the misses earlier and make adjustments. Jamar was the driving force behind the interventions resulting in improvement in performance, and all credit should be directed toward him.

A by-product of Jamar’s dedication was the disappointment that came along with not achieving desired results. During Jamar’s first three seasons, if his first event did not go well, it was a significant challenge for him to put it behind him. This often snowballed into him struggling in the other events in which he competed that day. This was also seen during a series of jumps: If his first two jumps did not go well, it was probable that the remaining jumps would not go well either.

In 2021, there were multiple times where Jamar showcased the ability to put what he deemed a bad attempt or subpar performance in the rearview mirror and not let it impact what he did moving forward. While I had many conversations with him during the tough times, the most credit in this area should be given to his mother, who was a constant source of support. While the incredible improvement in long jump was a pleasure to watch, Jamar’s improvement in being able to effectively deal with adversity was, without question, my favorite part of the 2021 season.

Jamar does not know this, but during our sectional competition, he was well short of the state qualifying standard after his first two attempts. I texted our coaching staff and said, “not looking good for Jamar.” In previous years, Jamar would have let the first two attempts send him into a downward spiral; however, Jamar was able to keep his poise and exceed the qualifying mark on his third attempt.

I was never happier to eat my words than the ones I had sent in that text to our coaching staff!

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

Every strength and conditioning coach in team sports secretly dreams about one thing—being called the “Fitness Guru” by journalists and peers in the field. There is no better feast for the ego than hearing the announcer in a televised match stating this with excitement, in terms like “They are dominating the physical battle!”

Indeed, in team sports, what we really strive for as S&C coaches is to somehow make our players less inclined to fatigue than our opponents as the game progresses. Being the mastermind behind a team that outworks the opposition, snatching win after win in the dying moments of the game regardless of any technical or strategical superiority…this is what we live for.

In team sports, what we really strive for as S&C coaches is to somehow make our players less inclined to fatigue than our opponents as the game progresses. Share on X

Surprisingly, with so much at stake, nobody has yet come forward with the magic recipe for fitness dominance in team sports. Even worse, *conditioning* is the aspect of physical performance training that casually displays the least specific definition. If strength or speed development is discussed at length by purported field experts and academics—spreading clear principles and guidelines all over the internet—conditioning is left in a fog, subject to interpretation. Fitness in team sports is a complicated topic, where the range of efforts, durations, and intensities is wide and constantly varying—but this won’t prevent us from trying to establish a guideline usable for any team sport.

Knowing the Demands of the Sport

If you ask me if an athlete is fit or not, I can’t answer until you narrow that down to fit for what? Fitness in team sports and conditioning as a training component has three main purposes:

1. To allow the players to meet the energy demands of the game they play.
2. To prepare for the worst, the most intense, passages of play.
3. To build mental and physical resilience.

The first role of a conditioning program is nothing complicated or tricky. The energy demands of the game you play is a known known. All the information needed is readily available through game analysis.

The difficult part here is to accept that nothing fancy or new is required to nail that aspect of a conditioning program. Energy system pathways have been widely studied, and it is with good confidence that one can heavily rely on the findings from scientific papers when designing a conditioning plan. Everything we do requires the transfer of energy adenosine triphosphate (ATP). This is our body’s currency, and the more work needed, the more ATP needs to be produced. Because the intramuscular stores of ATP are relatively small (~5 mmol per kilogram of wet muscle), they are unable to sustain contractile activity for extended periods; therefore, other metabolic pathways must be activated.

Three basic energy systems exist in muscle cells to replenish ATP:

1. The phosphagen system (anaerobic alactic): Provides immediate energy for short bursts (1-15 seconds) of maximal-intensity exercise by using energy stored in the muscle (phosphocreatine) without requiring oxygen (anaerobic).
2. The glycolytic system (anaerobic lactic): Takes over just before the phosphagen system runs out and provides energy for moderate- to high-intensity exercise (10 seconds to 3 minutes) using energy from the breakdown of carbohydrates (glucose) and requires no oxygen (anaerobic).
3. The oxidative system (aerobic): Predominant energy supplier for low- to moderate-intensity exercise, starts to predominate after about 2-3 minutes of exercise, and is the main source of energy after 3-4 minutes. It produces ATP through the breakdown of both carbohydrates and fats for energy and uses lactate as an energy source too. This system requires oxygen (aerobic).

Designing a successful conditioning program starts by identifying the athletic abilities critical to the sport & the energy system involved in providing the necessary fuel to perform that ability. Share on X

The level of development of the various energy systems has a significant impact on translating athletic abilities into performance—therefore, designing a successful conditioning program starts with identifying which athletic abilities are critical to the sport and which energy system is involved in providing the necessary fuel to perform that ability.

If this is a good place to start, unfortunately the relationship between an energy system and an athletic ability isn’t static. During exercise, the dominance of one energy system over the others depends mainly on these four factors:

1. Exercise intensity.
2. Duration of effort.
3. Number of efforts produced.
4. Type and duration of recovery between efforts.

In team sports, the last two are sometimes forgotten. With the obsession for repeated high-intensity efforts, it isn’t rare to come across coaches—armed with GPS targets and heart rate monitors—nailing the running intensity and mirroring their game demands in term of bout duration. But quite often, those same coaches arbitrarily define the number of efforts and the work:rest ratio used, increasing the former and shrinking the latter as a mean to progress the drill.

If an effort that is perfectly designed to target the lactic system is repeated too many times or without a proper work:rest ratio, it soon becomes a subpar aerobic stimulus, which may completely miss the specificity of the sport.

Coaches often feel pressured by time constraints when planning a conditioning session in team sports. The need to maintain the rhythm of the session to avoid facing a group of bored players waiting around for their next run makes it difficult to plan the long rest periods needed to target the lactic system. Moreover, rarely do S&C coaches get offered stand-alone conditioning sessions, and the fitness work must somehow fit in sessions that also include technical and strategical work, often in slots not exceeding 20 minutes.

A way to deal with such limitations is to work our way backward from the needed work:rest ratio to determine the duration of each effort. Instead of planning the effort duration in order to match a pre-identified key metric (e.g., average play duration) and the number of repetitions to match a subjective expected metric number (e.g., distance or number of sprints)—sacrificing without too much second thought the work:rest ratio—I would argue that we would often be better off ensuring we hit the target we want, physiologically speaking, before worrying about what the GPS will say.

I would argue that we would often be better off ensuring we hit the target we want physiologically speaking, before worrying about what the GPS will say. Share on X

Let’s imagine, for instance, that we are planning a session of repeated high-intensity efforts aimed at stressing the lactic system. We are given 10 minutes. Alone with our whistle, we cannot afford any individualization of the runs’ timing, so it is convenient to go with the start-on-the-minute system. We can then select our effort bouts’ durations depending on the number of efforts we can afford in 10 minutes while respecting an optimal work-to-rest ratio. If we choose to go for 20-second bouts, at an ideal work:rest ratio of 1:5 to maintain the stress on the lactic system for the entire duration of the drill, we will get about six repetitions.

Planning Conditioning Games

Getting the work:rest ratio that you need is a relatively straightforward quest when the conditioning stimulus is obtained through a physical-only drill such as runs, jumps, or ground-based/wrestle-style activities. With the days of fartlek, MAS running, and repeated sprinting seemingly behind us, nowadays the trendy S&C coach vents to whomever is happy to listen about how they get their players fit and ready for the competition without taking away the specificity of the game. In the era of obsessive need for specificity, conditioning games and “worst-case scenario practice” are at the center of sports teams’ conditioning programs.

However, while throwing a ball around may slightly increase the technical demand placed on the players, if it comes at the expense of physiological specificity or strategic principles, we may well be wasting our time.

As Yogi Berra once said: “If you don’t know where you are going, you may never get there.” And that is exactly the pitfall of programming conditioning games. Taking players to exhaustion by means of a fun and engaging activity sounds like a great deal—we get tons of running volume, sprinting, jumping, and sports-specific additional mechanical demand such as collision if we want to. Through the rules, space, and duration utilized, we can get anything we desire in term of physical output. Instead of facing players looking sadly at their feet, waiting anxiously in line for the whistle to be blown during a traditional MAS running block, we can get them happy and fully engaged by disguising the fitness work in a game.

The GPS reports are flattering, the technical coaches are involved, the players are cheerful… conditioning games can quickly become like a drug for the S&C. But the moment we realize, as performance practitioners, that we are designing our conditioning drill to be as entertaining as possible, we need to pull ourselves out of the circus we created and go back to the drawing board.

I remember once visiting a rugby team training. From the sideline, I watched—stunned—as the players suffered through a conditioning game that screamed torture, while listening incredulously to their strength and conditioning coach’s explanation. His aim was to increase the lactic capacity of his players because analysis of the game revealed that most ball in play sequences lasted 30 to 45 seconds. Forcing his troops to go all out for 30-second bouts with 30 seconds of rest in between, by the fifth bout the GPS data may well have been through the roof, but the drill stopped targeting the lactic system. The poor players were doing aerobic work, unable to change gears anymore, while trying their best to make it look “high intensity.”

Some kind of model or guideline seems like it should absolutely be required when it comes to conditioning games, because it is so easy to get carried away and get it wrong. First of all, even the basics of conditioning programming—volume, intensity, and work:rest ratio—can quickly become a nightmare to plan and result in unsatisfactory compromises, especially when technical coaches get involved. You may, for instance, have all agreed that the aim of the conditioning game is to stress the aerobic system. Everything is going according to plan: the effort bout’s duration, the intensity, the work:rest ratio are all in their optimal range. Then, suddenly, the head coach—vexed by the number of technical errors—decides to punish the players by moving from touch to full contact (raising the involvement of the anaerobic system considerably) or to deliver a lengthy rant, blowing away the work:rest ratio.

Involving technical coaches in conditioning games is a fantastic way to ensure that the game isn’t just a way to make conditioning work more pleasurable for the players, but a real learning experience that will contribute to improved performance in the technical area too. However, before doing so, it is absolutely necessary to work with them on developing a common language and understanding surrounding the boundaries defining each type of game.

A first option is to categorize conditioning games according to the energy system targeted. The duration of the physical bouts and the intensity required, as well as the work:rest ratio and the nature of the recovery, are specified, and all staff members involved during the conditioning game are responsible for enforcing those parameters. The central nervous system (CNS) involvement—especially through explosive actions such as jumping or accelerating/decelerating and changing direction—and the number of impacts or collisions complete the list of agreed-upon defining parameters due to the effect of those on energy system pathways.

Indeed, for a conditioning game to be classified as an aerobic capacity one, not only should the duration of each physical bout exceed eight minutes and the work:rest ratio be maintained below 1:1, but the CNS involvement and number of collisions need to be kept very low. Too many explosive changes of direction and physical duels would increase the anaerobic contribution to the overall energy production, swiftly shifting the game toward a more lactic dominant activity.

If such a model surely provides some basis to a more efficient and smoother conditioning games programming, it is still far from exhaustive. There is much more to a conditioning game than just a physiological stimulus.

Running and jumping load are not enough to clearly picture the actual energy demand of a conditioning game, nor the amount of fatigue it creates. In addition to the physical load, coaches need to add the cognitive and emotional loads.

To clearly picture the actual energy demand of a conditioning game and the amount of fatigue it creates, coaches need to add the cognitive & emotional loads in addition to the physical one. Share on X

The brain consumes more energy at rest than any other part of the human body, and it is a safe assumption that increasing the cognitive workload during a conditioning game will compound the resulting level of fatigue and energy spent. Factors weighing in on the cognitive load of a conditioning game are:

• The density and volume of decision-making.
• The number of technical gestures involved, as well as the quality and precision required in their execution to meet the task demand.
• The level of expectation asserted by coaches standing by.
• The complexity of the strategic plan and the extent of cooperative efforts needed to achieve them.

Emotions are known to be able to change physiology. A player feeling anxious or stressed will undoubtedly undergo a rise in their cortisol level, impacting their ability to adapt and recover efficiently, as well as a rise of catecholamines directly impairing their ability to take on new information, learn, and remember. If it is sadness, disappointment or regret that is swallowing the poor individual, then a dopaminergic crisis follows and increases their chances of feeling pain, of contracting a non-contact injury, or of maladaptation to the training load. On the other side, excitement, happiness, or alertness contributes to an optimized adaptation to the physical stimulus as well as learning abilities.

It is important to be aware and to understand that a game designed to target the aerobic capacity system will have a completely different impact on the player’s physiology, fatigue, and adaptation if it includes technical gestures or tactical plans looked over by a head coach in a bad mood—yelling and threatening at every mistakes—or if it is a relaxed and fun activity without any other aim than getting them to run a certain volume without complaining or looking bored.

Physical, cognitive, and emotional loads all contribute to the stimulus a conditioning game delivers to its participants. There is no magic formula, nor any right or wrong—the ability to manipulate those three variables in order to obtain a certain kind of adaptation are at the center of the art of planning conditioning games.

Moreover, we tend to consider conditioning games as exclusively a means to get a particular physiological stimulus, but if we look at it in a more holistic way, we quickly realize that for technical coaches, conditioning games can be used as learning experiences reinforcing some critical technical skills and tactical principles, or for developing more general cognitive abilities.

Conditioning games are a powerful training drill able to stress multiple important qualities required to achieve high performance. To grasp the full scope of potential benefits of conditioning games, beyond just energy system development, as well as to provide some guidelines on how to better plan them, it is necessary to come up with a model. Here comes the quadratic model.

The Quadratic Model

The quadratic model classifies conditioning games according to their position on two continuums. The first continuum addresses the main goal of the activity, opposing straightforward physiological stimulus (the purpose of the game is just to be less boring than a traditional running drill) and learning experience (the purpose of the game is to improve the team’s technical and tactical knowledge and mastery).

The second continuum is the one of specificity, from sport specific (the game played is designed to involve technical and tactical components of the sport) to general development (the game played involves technical and tactical components that best serve the development of a particular ability or quality, irrespective of their origin).

Such a proposed modeling allows the inclusion of three different types of loads and combines them to optimally serve the purposes of the planned conditioning game.

Each quadrant comes with a set of principles that the practitioner can use as general guidelines.

Quadrant A: Sport-Specific Physiological Stimulus

Games in this quadrant have as a main objective to stress a particular energy system while reinforcing technical (and to a lesser degree tactical) proficiency by incorporating a similar ball, rules, and scoring opportunities as the actual sport. To ensure this objective can be achieved, three principles ought to be observed.

The 80-20 Rule

Eighty percent of the game should be identical to the sport played. This means that amongst the five main design components, four should be consistent with a match situation:

1. Duration of activity and rest.
2. Size of pitch.
3. Number of players.
4. Game rules.
5. Intensity of actions.

The remaining 20% are subjected to regulation in order to emphasize the desired energy pathway and musculoskeletal stimulus. Examples of regulation are:

• Small-sided games: to target aerobic power and anaerobic capacity through an increase in acceleration/ decelerations, sprints and change of direction, as well as increased density of displacement (work/rate).
• Bigger field games: to target aerobic capacity and speed endurance through an increase in distance covered at medium, high, and very high intensities.
• Pre-set sequences of play: to target the lactic system and overall stamina by repeating passages of play for a standard duration with a stable work:rest ratio.
• Rule modifications: aimed at encouraging or removing a particular behavior in order to better induce a certain physiological stimulus (no contact, set pieces replaced with live ball injection, can only score after a certain number of passes, etc.)

Objective Assessment:

The game is designed to meet objective, quantifiable, and measured targets, as recorded by a GPS tracker or heart rate monitor. At any time during the game, the type of regulation can be modified to ensure those targets are met, as they are reflective of the physiological stimulus imposed. Game duration and intensity can be altered to continue fitting the pre-set objective goals of the drill, no matter if the scoring requirements of the proposed game have been met or not.

Redundancy:

Technical gestures and tactical cooperation needed to play the game are kept basic and well known. As cognitive and physical demands compete for the players’ resources, the burden placed on the brain is eased by requiring only a skill set that the individuals are very comfortable with. Novelty is avoided here whenever possible, and the same games are played over and over again, thereby inducing low levels of stress, anxiety, and learning in order to allow physiology to be the limiting factor.

Quadrant B: Sport-Specific Learning Experience

Games in this quadrant have as their main objective improving tactical and technical performance to positively impact the next match result. To ensure this objective can be achieved, three principles ought to be observed.

Dynamic Feedback:

Games in this quadrant do not include any sorts of regulations that go against the normal flow of the sport practiced. Unlike those of the three other quadrants, games designed to be a sport-specific learning experience sanction or reward behaviors that are exactly what would occur during a match. For instance, during a conditioning game of quadrant A, a player making a line break and providing a scoring opportunity can be stopped before the end of their action and the ball can be given to the opposition in another area of the field in order to force a rapid reorganization and increase the work rate.

Such a negative consequence of a very positive action for a player and his team is comprehensible when a physiological stimulus is targeted, but it is completely against the logic of the sport. Therefore, when the goal is to create a learning experience, positive actions need to be rewarded with positive outcomes and negative ones sanctioned by tur-overs and loss of territory.

Games in this quadrant leave the actions and decisions of both teams to dictate the rhythm and outcome of plays, using unplanned stoppages (errors, scoring) to reset and debrief with little regulation other than referring according to the rules of the sport.

Subjective Assessment:

Here, sport science technologies are run in the background as the coaching eyes prevail. The ultimate goal of a learning experience is to acquire knowledge and reinforce proficiency in a particular domain. Therefore, to tell when the actions of the players demonstrate a successful learning experience is up to the technical staff. The number of repetitions and the volume, intensity, and work:rest ratio of such games show the optimal acquisition of the tactical and technical principles the team is working on. The physiological stimulus obtained may therefore be different from one practice to another, and it is the responsibility of the physical performance staff to have options planned around the game itself to compensate for an above or below expectations physiological stimulus.

Differentiation:

A sport-specific learning experience game differs from other tactical and technical drills by targeting learning through differentiation. Games in this quadrant should offer the players a situation in which no two repetitions are the same. Indeed, a sport-specific learning experience game should not be a process of repeating a solution (rehearsal) but a process of finding and adapting a solution (discovery). Learning is obtained through “repetitions without repetition,” where players mostly implicitly gain understanding and mastery of a tactical or technical aspect of the sport by differentiating between successful solutions and less prolific ones. Since strong negative emotions can shut down learning and memory, it is important to create a situation where players feel safe and encouraged to be creative and explore solutions without fear of being criticized and judged.

A sport-specific learning experience game should not be a process of repeating a solution (rehearsal) but a process of finding and adapting a solution (discovery). Share on X

Quadrant C: Physiological Stimulus Aimed at General Development

Games in this quadrant have the objective of delivering a strong physiological stimulus with an emphasis on a specific energetic system, while keeping players engaged and motivated through the use of a collective task requiring collaboration rather than traditional conditioning drills. To ensure this objective can be achieved, three principles ought to be observed.

The 80-20 Rule (reversed):

Flipping the 80-20 principle observed in quadrant A, this time, 80% of the game is subjected to regulations that aim at targeting the desired physiological stimulus (see examples of regulations in the quadrant A section), and only 20% is kept specific to the sport. Trying to obtain a strong physiological stimulus by playing a game that is completely foreign to the players or less than 20% specific poses the problem of a higher cognitive demand (new skill set to learn and acquire) competing with the physical demand for limited resources. In order to maximally focus on the physiological stimulus, you better keep the cognitive demand low.

Objective Assessment:

(As discussed in quadrant A.)

Cohesion: 

Targeting a physiological stimulus through a non-sport-specific game is subject to more variability and fewer precise and individualized outcomes than traditional conditioning drills. To justify choosing a less optimal mean to achieve a physiological goal such as the development of an energy system, “making the players happy and more motivated” isn’t enough. Games in this quadrant should be designed to enhance cohesion through situations requiring groups of players to collaborate, work for one another, and support each other. Non-specific conditioning games are generally planned during the pre-season—coupling energy system development with team bonding seems an interesting prospect.

Quadrant D: Learning Experience Aimed at General Development

Games in this quadrant have as a main objective to improve general cognitive abilities such as vision, problem-solving, reaction time, dexterity, or tactical sense. To ensure this objective can be achieved, three principles ought to be observed.

Transfer:

Despite not being present as such in the sport played, the situations created and the skills required to answer them require players to find cognitive and motor solutions that are transferrable to their actual needs. For instance, a game played in a much larger field than the one used for their sport can improve football players’ peripheral vision. Since peripheral vision is a critical aspect of football performance, the learning experience created through the means of a non-specific game requiring a larger field (such as Aussie rules) has a transferrable solution to the sport of football. Another example would be catching a smaller and faster ball, therefore improving the dexterity of the players’ hands—this is meaningful and transferrable to a rugby player or a goalkeeper.

Downregulation:

The use of a conditioning game to target the development of a general cognitive ability should be aimed at continuing to improve performances while giving the player a break from the fast-paced, cutthroat, and repetitive day-to-day practices. Taking a step back—both away from the sport and toward an activity that has no intent to overly stress the body or directly improve the team tactical or technical mastery—can considerably lower the pressure gauge. When faced with a congested competitive schedule or environmentally and emotionally draining situations (such as travel crossing multiple time zones or a rivalry series), games in this quadrant can offer an opportunity to continue to create meaningful learning experiences while avoiding more stress and strain on the players.

Cohesion:

This is shared with quadrant C. If a game is the vehicle chosen to deliver a learning experience aimed at general development instead of individual skill work, it should be because of the cohesion aspect it brings. A tennis-volley game is superior to a kick-to-target drill to enhance general kicking accuracy for a football player because of the communication, collaboration, and shared emotions it creates amongst the participants in each team.

If a game is used to deliver a learning experience aimed at general development instead of individual skill work, it should be because of the cohesion aspect it brings. Share on X

Bringing It Together

All fundamental goals of a conditioning program for team sports—to meet the demand of the game, to prepare for the worst, and to build resilience—can be achieved through the proper planning and design of conditioning games.

To accomplish this, practitioners need to look beyond the style of conditioning drill a game has to fit according to the physical performance program needs. Instead, they need to work with technical coaches to decide where on the specificity and learning experience continuums the activity should be placed to optimally fit the overall plan.

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

You have just become the head track coach at a small school. The school has athletes, but how do you convince them to run track? You have a track, but what do you do when it’s cold? Or raining? Or snowing in March? What do you do with athletes that miss time because they play baseball? Or miss the first several weeks because they play basketball or wrestle? How do you get kids to show up over the summer, when football is the most important sport?

These are some of the dilemmas that small school track and field coaches have to deal with on a yearly basis. Being competitive year after year at a small school can be a challenging and daunting task, but it is absolutely doable. These are tactics that I have found to be the most effective in creating not only a successful track season, but a successful, long-lasting program that produces high level athletes and results on a yearly basis.

Being competitive year after year at a small school can be a challenging and daunting task, but it is absolutely doable, says @SFStormTrack. Share on X

1. Recruit

Ask any coach in a small school and they will tell you there are athletes walking the halls that choose not to do sports—not just track, but anything. While that is most certainly their prerogative, my goal is to get the best athletes in the school on the track team. Find ways to interact with the athletes you want on the team. Stop them in the hallway and strike up a conversation. Talk to their friends on the team and find out what the drawback is relating to track and find a common solution. If they do play another sport, go cheer them on, they’ll notice you there—my family and I went to our first high school soccer game to cheer on one of my athletes, but also to look at a few other potential track members.

Also, for those playing another sport, talk to their coaches. Sell them on the idea of how track can benefit them for their primary sport—other coaches can be your best ally if approached properly. The good part about recruiting for track is you have an entire semester to convince athletes to come out. We are a “Feed the Cats” type program, which utilizes max speed and max rest, which is another great selling point. The main part of recruiting for me is stressing how transferable track and field skills are. The movements that we perform translate to every other sport, making it the perfect way to train in the off-season.

2. Utilize the School Day

Most small schools don’t have a S&C coach or a state-of-the-art weight room. It is important then to utilize what you have during the day. One of our PE teachers, who is our new girls track and field coach, recently started an Advanced PE class. The class is designed for athletes to get workouts in during the day and includes:

• Weight training specific to the season phase they are in.
• Speed workouts.
• Recovery techniques.
• Nutrition.
• Plyometrics.
• Other great things you would see in a good track program.

The benefit of this are three-pronged.

1. It saves coaches time. Things that can be done in PE are done in PE, allowing in-season coaches to focus on more sport-specific practice plans as opposed to finding time to incorporate sprinting and lifting. They work on sport-specific lifts in-season, as well as explosive lifts throughout the year. All coaches want fast kids, and this allows our kids to work on and maintain speed throughout the school year, not just during track season.
2. Athletes in high school are student-athletes. They have lives outside of school and practice. The same can be said for coaches! The better we can utilize the time they have to be here during the school day, the better.
3. Students can find joy in sprinting or maybe discover they are faster than they thought they were and our Advanced PE class can oftentimes work as an extra recruiter.

3. Convince Other Coaches

One of the best things that I have done in the past few years is collaborate with the other coaches at our school. I frequently speak with Steve Trompeter, our Girls Track and Field Head Coach, about best practices and how we can get better; however, we both decided we also needed to do a better job of working with coaches outside of our sport.

One of the best things that I have done in the past few years is collaborate with the other coaches at our school, says @SFStormTrack. Share on X

For the last two summers, track, football, and basketball have worked together to create a common schedule over the summer in order to get as many of our athletes as fast and explosive as we can. Two days a week, all through the summer, we sprint. I don’t mean just track kids—I mean football and basketball and soccer and volleyball and anyone else that wants to show up. The track kids bring their spikes, everyone else runs in flats and everyone sprints. Everyone works on form. Everyone jumps. Everyone gets timed. We celebrate PR’s, whether it is a football lineman going under 6 seconds for the first time or the fastest kid on the track team running his new best time.

During the pandemic-delayed football spring season in 2021, the schedule overlapped with track season for a month. Our Advanced PE class didn’t sprint last year because we were on a half-day schedule all year, 25 minute classes. My initial thought was “What am I going to do for a month without a team and how am I going to get this team ready for the season?” The solution? Work together. Football practice started on Mondays and Wednesdays with speed training. We ran 40s on Monday; on Wednesdays, skill-position players ran Fly 10’s and linemen ran 20-yard sprints out of a stance. Problem solved. Everyone benefitted—especially the kids. Oh, by the way, after having most of the football team speed training for the last 5 months, they started their fall season 3-0 with a lot of fast dudes scoring long touchdowns.

4. Don’t Try to Make Up for Lost Time

During the season, we deal with a lot of adversity. At our school, we have athletes that are dual sport athletes, 3- or 4-sport athletes that come into the season later than others. We deal with weather in central Illinois throughout the winter and spring, and we lack facilities. We are going to use the time we have and not try to move backwards.

At a small school, the number of high level athletes is limited, some years more than others. As coaches, we encourage our athletes to be multi-sport athletes for many reasons: we want our athletes busy in the off-season, they can help recruit from one sport to another, and all of us coaches in the same school are friends and want to help each other out.

Track starts in January, wrestling and basketball end in late February/early March. That’s okay! Give them some rest, let them come in on their own time. Track is a long season and it doesn’t matter so much until May. It’s not about where you start, it’s about where you finish. We also have dual athletics, meaning students are allowed to participate in more than one sport in a season. Again, it helps at a small school to have athletes on your team even if you have to share. In 2019, we won a state title. Three state qualifiers, including our all-state shot and discus thrower, were also on the regional champion baseball team.

It’s not about where you start, it’s about where you finish, says @SFStormTrack. Share on X

In 2021, some of our state-qualified sprinters—both a part of the state 4×200 champion relay team and the state 4×100 runner-up relay team—were also wrestling at the same time! There were times when they missed practice for wrestling meets. Did I try to get them “caught up” in track? No. The reason was rest—it doesn’t help to make them more tired than they already are by catching them up on missed workouts. As Tony Holler often says, “tired is the enemy, not the goal.” Young athletes are resilient and will recover if given the opportunity. I would much rather ease athletes into the season than force workouts on to them that they aren’t prepared for. This can lead to injuries and ultimately derail a promising season.

Another problem that arises in cold weather states (like Illinois) is trying to make up for lost days when the weather is too cold or too snowy or too rainy to do anything outside. As a track coach, you have to be creative. We don’t have a fancy indoor facility. Our high school gym is busy with basketball from right after school until usually 7pm. In the spring, softball gets the gym, not track. We have no hallways in our high school that are conducive to running.

So, what do we do? Find somewhere the kids can jump.

For us, that’s the weight room. We work on explosiveness as much as possible. Find the best area you can possibly find to “sprint.” We walk to our elementary school, which is luckily just a parking lot away—and in there we have the longest hallway we can utilize. It gives us enough space to “sprint” in flats for about 40 yards until we have to slow down to not slam into a wall. Is this ideal to become the fastest versions of ourselves? No, but it’s what we have to work with. Still, we don’t work backwards—if we are forced inside, we do what we can with the day and move on to the next day. We can’t make up for lost days.

5. Cut Out the Fluff

Anyone with a Twitter account who follows as many track and S&C coaches as possible can quickly be inundated with hundreds of different drills, techniques, and workouts that their promoters claim to be the best. While all may have a purpose, it is important to utilize what works best for YOUR program.

While all drills may have a purpose, it is important to utilize what works best for YOUR program, says @SFStormTrack. Share on X

In my early days as a coach in northern Illinois, I wanted to incorporate as many different ideas as possible into my program. Then I realized that sometimes excessiveness was a detriment: kids weren’t improving like I wanted, kids weren’t enjoying track as much as I wanted. I felt as if I was letting my team down. Once I moved to Catlin and adapted my philosophy, the team started to reap the rewards.

As a Feed the Cats program, I buy into the idea that we sprint, we jump, and we get acidic, but only intermittently. The last 6 teams I have coached at Salt Fork, we have averaged only 19 kids per year. I anticipate about the same amount this upcoming spring season. However, we have high buy-in from the kids that are on the team. They learn the system and they become experts at what they do because speed is important but technique is equally as important.

When teams are willing and able to focus on the little things, big changes can happen. These can be done with relatively little of the “tired factor.” Don’t run over countless hurdles day after day—instead, work on the form, focus on knee drive, arms, posture. Don’t sprint every day—instead, work on form, knee drive, foot position, arms, starts, posture. Don’t jump every day—instead work on take off angles, stride pattern, jump form, landing position.

When teams are willing and able to focus on the little things, big changes can happen, says @SFStormTrack. Share on X

All of these can be done with simple drills that may seem repetitive to athletes at times, but when taught properly can yield huge gains. This method has resulted in 47% of our team making it to the Illinois state track meet over the last four seasons. Not only that, but of the 60 events we have competed in, at the last four sectional meets, we have qualified in 35 of them (or 58% of events). Cutting out the fluff isn’t just for sprinters—it is for all events to promote high level mastery of technique while incorporating as much rest and recovery as possible to reduce the chances of injury.

Communication Breeds Success

Being a small school track and field coach can be extremely frustrating at times, without the same facilities, money, and numbers as schools that have larger classes than we have kids in our district. However, when done right, it can be extremely rewarding and fulfilling.

In my years of coaching track, I have found that there is no right way to run a program. I know and talk to other successful track coaches from small schools that operate similarly to us, and also others that operate totally different. The common denominator in all of these key attributes of our program is communication.

Without communication, we would have never collaborated as coaches to design a PE class for our athletes or set up a summer program that benefits all of our athletes. Without communication, we wouldn’t be able to share athletes properly throughout the school year or within the same season in a way that avoids injury. Without communication, it would be difficult to find space to utilize throughout the season. Without communication with our student-athletes, it would be impossible to recruit new members to the team or to be up to date on their recovery during the season. And when small schools put it all together, they aren’t just small school fast, they are CHAMPIONSHIP FAST.

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

By Gabriel Mvumvure and Kim Goss

If there’s one bold statement that we can make about hamstrings pulls, it’s “whatever most athletes are doing to prevent them, it’s not working!” It seems no matter how much an athlete stretches or what special strength training exercises they perform, hamstring injuries are still some of the most common injuries among those who need to move fast.

Let’s explore why so many athletes get hamstring injuries and what can be done to prevent it.

Is Sprinting Dangerous?

There is a widespread belief that sprinting is an unnatural activity that causes the body to become “quad dominant,” increasing the stress on the hamstrings. It follows that to stay healthy, sprinters must get their sprinting muscles in balance by performing special knee flexion and hip extension exercises. We contend that sprinting itself is not the cause of hamstring pulls, but rather, poor sprinting technique is to blame.

One issue we’ve seen with many freshman sprinters is they have compromised their technique to achieve lower times. “Run faster, turn left!” as the saying goes. Not only are the technique faults from such training a challenge to correct, but they can cause chronic injuries we have to address when the athletes enter our program.

One issue we’ve seen with many freshman sprinters is they have compromised their technique to achieve lower times. Share on X

The most common technique fault in sprinting is overstriding, such that the contact foot lands too far in front of the athlete’s center of mass (see video 1 below). One study found that “the runners with hamstring injuries demonstrated 4.9° greater overstride angles compared with the healthy control runners.” The researchers said one cause of these injuries could be excessive tension. “When the foot lands on the ground with overstride mechanics, the hamstring musculature may be stretched eccentrically, which may facilitate in increasing the tension on the hamstring muscle bundles.”

Video 1. Overstriding increases the stress on the hamstrings, making the athlete more susceptible to injury.

Optimal sprinting technique involves placing the contact foot in a position where it can apply maximum force into the ground. The more force applied into the ground, the greater the stride length. The greater the stride length, the more ground covered with each step and the faster the athlete moves. For example, in 1991, Carl Lewis took 43 steps when he established his 100m world record of 9.86 seconds. In 2009, Usain Bolt needed just 40.92 steps to cover that distance and finished in 9.58 seconds!

If the contact foot lands in front of the hips, less vertical force is applied to the ground and stride length is decreased. That’s not good, but what’s worse is that the athlete’s hamstrings must work harder by pulling the foot across the ground, increasing the stress on these muscles. So how can overstriding be corrected? Let’s start with an off-track sprinting drill.

In video 2 below, one of our sprinters demonstrates a drill to correct overstriding that can be performed in a gym. The setup involves attaching an elastic band to the top of a power rack and hooking the other end around the ankle of the working leg. From this starting position, the athlete performs a high step march in place, focusing on driving that foot to their center of mass. We especially like that the drill has a built-in feedback quality, because the athlete will lose their balance if they step in front of their center of mass.

Video 2. A gym-based drill using bands to correct overstriding.

Next, let’s look at a track drill to correct overstriding. In video 3 below, one of our sprinters demonstrates a wicket run that promotes optimal front-side mechanics with a high heel recovery. If an athlete overstrides, they will gallop over the wickets. Galloping results in a slower time, as the force production is less vertical. In addition, overstriding makes it more likely they will hit the wickets, causing them to lose their momentum.

Video 3. A wicket drill to correct overstriding.

Anatomy of a Hamstring Pull

Extensive research has revealed how most hamstring injuries occur and what area(s) of the hamstrings are most likely to be injured. But before going further, let’s address the belief that increasing hamstring flexibility is the key to preventing hamstring pulls.

A study on Australian rules footballers involved 67 athletes who were tested in the standing toe-touch before the season. During the season, eight players suffered a hamstring strain, but researchers found “no relationship between pre-season results of toe-touch test measurements and hamstring strains sustained during the football season.” Another study involved 34 athletes from rugby, hurling, and Gaelic football. Sixteen of the subjects had no history of hamstring injury during the preceding year. The researchers found that “differences in hamstring flexibility are not evident between injured and noninjured groups.”

Many other studies suggest that hamstring flexibility, along with static stretching intervention programs, have no influence on preventing hamstring injuries. However, we’re not saying that static stretching has no value—just that it appears to have little influence in preventing hamstring pulls. But let’s move on.

Most sprinting injuries occur during the late swing phase, immediately before the foot strikes the ground. During this phase, the long head of the biceps femoris completes the longest stretch of all the hamstring muscles; it is also the area of the hamstrings most likely to become injured. If there is excessive tension in the biceps femoris during sprinting, an injury can occur. This is not a new concept.

The issue of incomplete muscle relaxation is a concept that must be considered when selecting exercises to strengthen the hamstrings. Share on X

“Soviet era research of muscle relaxation dates back to at least the 1930s,” says weightlifting sports scientist Bud Charniga. “The critical role of muscle relaxation; especially the speed of muscle relaxation; has been a consistent theme in efficacy of sport technique in East European literature ever since those days.” Charniga adds that Soviet sports scientist L.P. Matveyev referred to the incomplete relaxation of a muscle after contraction as “coordination enslavement.” Whatever it’s called, the issue of incomplete relaxation is a concept that must be considered when selecting exercises to strengthen the hamstrings.

The Case Against the Nordic Curl

A typical workout to prevent hamstring pulls might include one exercise for the knee flexion function of the hamstrings and one for the hip extension function of the hamstrings. For complete development, the exercises could be varied every few weeks. For example, to strengthen hip extension, one exercise could focus on the top range of the resistance curve (reverse hyper), another the mid-range (45-degree back extension), and another the bottom range (barbell good morning).

Although the number of sets and reps and other loading parameters can be debated, this approach seems to make sense. After all, as shown by the accompanying photo, many professional bodybuilders have proven that performing a variety of hamstring exercises with various resistance curves can add tremendous size to the hamstrings. However, when training an athlete, you must consider more than just resistance curves and workout protocols that make muscles pop out when you flex.

In addition to addressing movement patterns, limb speed must be considered when selecting the best resistance training exercises for the hamstrings. That is, how quickly muscles contract and relax and how connective tissues stretch and recoil. According to Charniga, exercises such as the Nordic curl are characterized by prolonged muscle tension that is “inconsistent with what actually occurs in the late swing phase of running and sprinting.”

Another factor to consider, which Charniga says is often ignored in the literature about hamstring injuries, is that the ability of the hamstrings to relax is influenced by other muscles, “especially from muscles such as the bi-articular gastrocnemius which cross the knee from below.”

The anatomy of the gastrocnemius is such that it can assist the hamstrings with knee flexion. You can easily experience the influence of the calves on knee flexion strength by performing leg curls. Point your toes (plantarflex) as you perform the exercise, work up to a max weight set of 10 reps. Now pull your toes toward you (dorsiflex) and use that same max weight—you will find this set to be considerably easier, such that you could probably perform another set with 5-10% more weight.

Putting this together, it makes sense that tension in the calves can affect the ability of the long head of the biceps femoris to stretch. “These muscles cross the knee from below,” says Charniga. “Any extension of the knee joint up to 180° can only occur if these muscles relax and lengthen, i.e., knee extension is affected from an ‘overlap’ or a ‘choke’ point of muscle attachments from above and below.”

If there is an injury-prevention effect of the Nordic curl, it doesn’t appear in the numbers. Share on X

The Nordic curl produces prolonged tension of the hamstrings with the calves held in a fixed position. As the hamstrings lengthen, the calves contract isometrically—this is not how these muscles function in sprinting. “Teaching an athlete to develop eccentric strength of the hamstring group to prevent injury with grinding, slow eccentric strength exercises is probably counterproductive; because sprinting actually requires a rapid onset of a late ‘braking phase’ as the leg swings forward and extends for ground contact, i.e., low tension followed by tension from stretching,” says Charniga.

Charniga says the Nordic curl is a popular exercise in the NFL, but he makes a strong case with injury data that extensive use of the exercise may be causing hamstring injuries. For example, the 2018 NFL season began on September 2, 2018. Despite a long off-season of strength and conditioning and controlled practice environments, 74 athletes were placed on the injured list with hamstring injuries. Before the start of the 2019 season, 43 athletes were sidelined with hamstring injuries! Further, between the 2018 and 2019 seasons, at least 25 athletes on average could not play due to hamstring injuries. If there is an injury-prevention effect of the Nordic curl, it doesn’t appear in the numbers.

Another issue is that the knee joint is fixed with the Nordic curl. “Any time you fix a joint, you increase the shear stress,” says Paul Gagné, a Canadian strength coach and posturologist. “For example, bodybuilders who focus too long on exercises that fix the elbow, such as preacher curls, often develop tendinitis in the elbow.” Gagné also has found that the Nordic curl places adverse stress on the popliteus muscle, which is involved in knee flexion and knee stability, and the meniscus. “My sports medicine colleagues have worked with numerous athletes who developed knee pain in these two areas from performing the Nordic curl for long periods,” says Gagné.

As for sport specificity, Gagné says the Nordic curl’s value must be questioned because the feet are not in contact with the ground & the hamstrings work w/muscles of the foot to produce movement. Share on X

As for sport specificity, Gagné says the value of the Nordic curl must be questioned because the feet are not in contact with the ground, and the hamstrings work with muscles of the foot to produce movement. Dr. Michel Joubert, a podiatrist and posturologist who has treated many of Gagné’s athletes, said it’s rare for him to find someone who has a hamstring injury who does not also have problems with the arches of the feet.

Although a complete hamstring strength program is beyond the scope of this article, we would like to leave you with a few alternative gym exercises to the Nordic curl.

The Elastic Strength Approach to Hamstring Training

Muscles must contract and relax quickly in sprinting, but athletic performance is not just about muscles. To produce the highest levels of speed and power, the tendons and other connective tissues must stretch and recoil quickly.

Elastic strength training methods look at these connective tissues as biological springs that absorb, store, and release energy. The more energy these tissues release, the faster and more powerful the movement. Charniga notes that the ground support time for an elite sprinter is so short that it “is not possible from mere muscular contraction.” And based on the data we’ve seen, Florence Griffith Joyner recorded the shortest ground support time ever for a woman, and Usain Bolt had the shortest time for a man.

One of the best sports for developing elastic strength is weightlifting, and the large range of motion these lifts require makes them especially effective for injury prevention. Most weightlifting coaches will never have to deal with a hamstring, ACL, or ankle injury because they are so rare. Let’s look at a real-world example.

One of the best sports for developing elastic strength is weightlifting, and the large range of motion these lifts require makes them especially effective for injury prevention. Share on X

From 2007 to 2012, 480 women competed in the European Weightlifting Championships. This event lasts about a week, and competitors do several workouts before they compete. These athletes performed perhaps as many as a quarter of a million total reps in snatches, clean and jerks, and squats during this period. Further, many of these lifts were performed with maximal weights. With this sample size, plus the women’s “fragile knee anatomy” and fluctuating hormones that are often blamed for their high injury rate (especially with the ACL), you would expect a horrific injury report. Not quite.

The number of hip, knee, hamstring, and ankle injuries reported during this period that required medical attention was zero. Again, zero. Compare this to most American sports, where about 70% of all knee, hamstring, and ankle injuries are non-contact and occur without load. As many motivational speakers are fond of saying, “Success leaves clues!”

In addition to weightlifting, there are many effective exercises that improve elastic strength. We want to leave you with a few we have our athletes perform.

The first exercise uses a Swiss ball and focuses on high-speed knee flexion, and the second uses bands and focuses on high-speed hip extension. Both exercises are performed at maximum speed and for a time limit to maintain quality, such as 30 seconds. (Note: we take no credit for creating these two exercises.) The exercises are demonstrated in videos 4 and 5 below, but first let’s go over a few notes.

In contrast to a prone leg curl—where the limbs move relatively slow—with this first exercise, the athlete moves their limbs as quickly as possible, kicking the ball with their heels as they do so.

Video 4. A high-speed knee flexion exercise.

For the second exercise, the athlete lifts their hips off the floor, maintains a neutral spine, and stabilizes their upper body with their arms as they perform a flutter kick as fast as humanly possible. We also have our athletes perform it with various foot/leg positions to emphasize different areas of the hamstrings.

Video 5. A high-speed hip extension exercise.

The last exercise is a single-leg assisted squat jump using a dumbbell. Kenneth Hunt, the jumps/combined events coach at Brown, deserves partial credit for creating this one. It could be considered an elastic strength exercise involving rapid contraction and relaxation of the thigh and calf muscles.

• Set up a power rack with a barbell resting inside of the bar catches, such that the supports will stop the bar if you pull back too hard. The bar should be raised to about chest height.
• Grasp a dumbbell in one hand and hold the bar with the other hand.
• Dorsiflex the foot of the working leg and lift the thigh until it is about parallel to the floor.
• Bend down to about a parallel position, then straighten your leg and hop a few inches off the floor—do not allow the opposite foot to touch the floor.
• Immediately squat down, focusing on reversing directions quickly at the bottom.

Perform all the reps in a set for one leg, then repeat with the opposite leg. To increase resistance, hold a heavier dumbbell.

Video 6. A single-leg assisted squat jump where resistance can be increased by holding heavier dumbbells.

These are just three of the many elastic strength exercises we use with our sprinters. One benefit we noticed from such training is a remarkable increase in vertical jumping ability in short periods, even for those who already have good verticals.

A complete hamstring prevention program involves many components that are beyond the scope of this article. For example, relatively weak glutes or collapsed foot arches (valgus) can increase the stress on the hamstrings. It’s also possible that athletes who have suffered serious hamstring tears may need medical intervention. For example, researchers have found that if an athlete has a previous hamstring injury, scar tissue can develop and linger that can “alter contraction mechanics” during running, increasing the risk of reinjury. This scar tissue may need to be addressed, such as with Active Release Techniques treatment®.

The bottom line is that sprinters, sprint coaches, and strength coaches must carefully consider running mechanics and the true value of strength training exercises for the hamstrings. Share on X

The bottom line is that sprinters, sprint coaches, and strength coaches must carefully consider running mechanics and the true value of strength training exercises for the hamstrings. Give the ideas presented in this article a try to keep your athletes moving fast and injury-free!

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

Kim Goss has a master’s degree in human movement and is a volunteer assistant track coach at Brown University. He is a former strength coach for the U.S. Air Force Academy and was an editor at Runner’s World Publications. Along with Paul Gagné, Goss is the co-author of Get Stronger, Not Bigger! This book examines the use of relative and elastic strength training methods to develop physical superiority for women. It is available through Amazon.com.

References

Bennell, K., Tully, E., and Harvey, N. “Does the toe-touch test predict hamstring injury in Australian Rules footballers?” Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. 1999;45(2):103-109.

Charniga, Bud. “How Is It Possible Weightlifters are Stronger,” May 11, 2020, sportivnypress.com.

Charniga, Bud. “A Stability/Instability Convexity,” April 23, 2021, www.sportivnypress.com.

Charniga, Bud. “Hamstring Injury: Prophylaxis Fallacies in Sport,” June 29, 2021, www.sportivnypress.com.

Charniga, Bud. “Hamstring Injury in Sport,” July 21, 2021, www.sportivnypress.com.

Hennessey, L. and Watson, A.W. “Flexibility and posture assessment in relation to hamstring injury.” British Journal of Sports Medicine. 1993;27(4):243-246.

Slider, A., Heiderscheit, B., Thelen, D.G., Enright, T., and Tuite, M.J. “MR observations of long-term musculotendon remodeling following a hamstring strain injury.” Skeletal Radiology. 2008;37(12):1101-1109.

Sugimoto, D., Kelly, B.D., Mandel, D.L., et al. “Running Propensities of Athletes with Hamstring Injuries.” Sports. 2019;7(9):210.

Here’s the scenario: You take over a new job or your coach greenlights your “innovative, new speed program.” Your excitement can’t be contained…until you then realize that you now must organize a workout for 100 players in a time-limited session of an hour.

Welcome to the world of football strength and conditioning!

When planning for these dynamic big group trainings, coaches need to take the sniper’s approach of aim small, miss small, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

From the pre-warm-up to the final session debrief, everything must be planned and rehearsed in advance to ensure the success of this type of session. Efficiency and urgency must play a major role in the outline and design—coaches do not have time for wasted reps or wasted time. When planning for these dynamic big group trainings, coaches need to take the sniper’s approach of aim small, miss small; meaning, you need to have specific goals for the workout and an exact prescription of modalities to address those goals, so that if any element is slightly off you can still hit the day’s main target.

Why Training Speed Is Important

Speed training is highly technical and requires adequate periods of recovery for athletes to perform reps with maximal effort and intent. Intent is king! Without the appropriate rest times, coaches are putting lipstick on a pig—meaning, they aren’t training speed. Learning requires max focus and attention; this cannot be achieved in an exhausted state. Teaching technical skills to large groups is not any easy task—add in the dilemma of time constraints, and it makes it almost impossible.

Many factors impact the effectiveness of speed workouts in large groups—for football, the workout must have a certain feel and flow to it that football coaches are familiar with. Football coaches don’t want to see kids standing around, but properly organizing the flow of a workout can build in rest and still give the feel of “grinding” without an excessive amount of unspecific work.

Factors to Consider When Planning

There are many things to think about when planning and executing a speed workout with more than 30 people. A coach never wants to look unprepared or overwhelmed in the administration of training. To prevent this, you must consider all potential issues and include contingency plans. You must conduct a thorough evaluation of the session’s organization—the term coaches in football often use to describe this process is “self-scout.” Auditing resources in your organization will paint a clearer picture about realistic training plans.

Factors to consider are:

• Number of coaches.
• Number of athletes.
• Equipment available.
• Weather patterns.
• Time in the training year.

These factors will guide and direct all decisions made on training. You can’t outkick your coverage; meaning, don’t set yourself up for failure by overshooting what you can realistically execute in your speed workouts. Don’t get into a session and plan five exercises, then get to the third exercise and run out of time.

You can’t outkick your coverage; meaning, don’t set yourself up for failure by overshooting what you can realistically execute in your speed workouts, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

Understand the limitations of your current situation and plan around them. You can’t plan hill sprints if there are no hills! Know the exact time demands of each station and the warm-up. Have all tech issues dialed in before the athletes start the session. Mitigate as many problems beforehand as possible.

Warm-Up

The purpose of the warm-up is to prepare the muscle tissues for the intensity of the upcoming exercises, express ranges of motion that are exhibited in the exercises, and add context for future drills that will be prescribed. When the entire duration of a workout can only be one hour in total, minimalist is the best practice in the design of warm-ups. We want to spend a maximum of 15 minutes on the warm-up. The workout itself will build in intensity, so there’s no need to spend extreme amounts of energy on the warm-up.

Some points of the warm-up will carry more of a sense of urgency than others, as we want to initially increase heart rate and body temperature. General, dynamic movements need fewer rest times, but building rest time into the specific warm-up drills is key so that athletes perform them with great intent and focus. One way to incorporate rest into the warm-up and increase coaching coverage is to separate the team into subgroups. We separate our team into four subgroups:

1. Skill.
2. Fast-mid.
3. Big-mid.
4. Bigs.

This allows extra rest between reps, because we wait for each group to complete the rep fully before sending on the next group, which will perform the given exercise completed by the previous group. Yardages and exercises may be altered to fit different groups—for example, for the skill group a straight leg bound may be prescribed as a 40-yard drill, while for the bigs group it is only a 20-yard drill.

Video 1. A minimalist approach to the warm-up is a must when time restraints are present.

Appearance of the Workout

As previously stated, the look and feel of the workout is extremely important. Coaches don’t like standing around, which is an issue as speed training requires large amounts of recovery to perform the reps in an explosive and fresh state. Coaches emphasize and demand that every rep is performed with maximal intent and effort. The players can’t perform that way under fatigued conditions, but if you like your job, players can’t just be lounging around.

The question becomes: How can the performance coach make 20-30 quality reps over 45 minutes look like a lot of work when it’s not? Optimal rest for speed work is one minute for every 10 yards of sprinting, so to get that recovery time while appearing to be in continual motion we utilize stations, waterfall starts, purposeful drill selection, and races.

Stations

Like the warm-up, having subgroups is an easy way to gain extra recovery in any drill. Essentially, one rep becomes four reps when dividing the team up, allowing for rest. Subgroups also provide more opportunities to coach because they give that coach fewer athletes to watch on a given rep, allowing more instruction on technique in each movement, proper mechanics, and visual examples of athletes performing it right within the subgroup. Having a staff of more than three coaches will give you the ability to run stations, and these allow more individualization because groups can be mailboxed together by either position or deficiency.

Multiple stations operating simultaneously also creates the illusion that a lot of work is being performed, even with the adequate rest periods being employed: football coaches are now watching three things happening instead of one. Stations can build off one another as the workout progresses, and this setup can also benefit organizations that might be short on specific equipment. If sled work or hurdle hops are prescribed, an organization may not have 40 sleds and 50 hurdles but having stations can make the equipment needs more manageable and efficient.

Stations can build off one another as the workout progresses, and this setup can also benefit organizations that might be short on specific equipment, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

Waterfall Starts

The system in place for execution of reps will aid rest and recovery if properly planned. I love to utilize waterfall starts, meaning when one player goes that sets off the next player in line to start. This method gives football coaches more eye candy.

Waterfall starts give coaches the ability to home in on one athlete at a time, providing more coaching opportunities and individual interactions. This setup allows coaches to stop the drill for technical interventions—if one athlete is making a technical mistake, chances are several other athletes are. You can catch issues and correct them with the proper cue before the next athlete makes that same mistake.

Another bonus of waterfall starts is that the athletes can watch successful reps and hear the coaches pointing out examples of great technical proficiency or effort. Coaches aren’t going to be able to correct 500 different mistakes, but they can give cues that attack the “big rocks.”

Video 2. Waterfall starts increase rest times significantly, because the next rep does not start until the last player has completed the rep.

Drill Selection

Success leaves clues, and some of the best performance coaches in the industry—such as Boo Schexnayder and Lee Taft—reiterate that the purpose of drills is to give context for skill development. One of my all-time favorite quotes for coaching is from Coach Boo: “If you are looking for drills, go to Ace Hardware—we teach skills.”

Drills should have precise reasons for being prescribed. There should be a why behind all exercises and a progression that feeds the skills being trained. Thought-out progressions lead to less coaching. Some coaches look at this as a negative, but more competent skill expression will lead to higher retention and far less coaching intervention. I know that we are grasping technical proficiency when my team makes workouts boring for me because I have less to coach.

Thought-out progressions lead to less coaching. Some coaches look at this as a negative, but more competent skill expression will lead to higher retention and far less coaching intervention. Share on X

Self-organization is a hot topic in the profession right now, and I believe in what coach Dan Pfaff has spoken about several times: that once an acceptable movement bandwidth is established, coaches can step back and let athletes feel and self-correct. To get to that point, drills need to start at the foundational level, then increase in technical demand followed by an increase in velocity demands. The most successful drills are ones that correct with minimal coaching cues. This is extremely valuable in the large group setting, because you will not catch all mistakes—there is not enough time to correct everyone in the session, and you will miss five kids while correcting one with a long, drawn-out explanation.

Progression of the workout should build according to the difficulty of the skills. I want to add context and clean up movement leading into the most technically demanding exercises of the workout. If we have fly-10s included on that day, we will do some variation of wickets followed by the flys. Progressions aren’t just working out to work out; they can be applied in the workout themselves.

Races

Increasing speed has everything to do with intent. In my experience, coaches can inspire increased intent by timing reps and by placing players in competitive environments. We employ races throughout the off-season in several different ways and in different drills. The moment you ask who the fastest kid on the team is, you better be ready for supra-maximal effort.

We have used distances from 10 yards to full field relays; we have had the entire team lined up to race, and we have paired two players against each other. Bottom line: Races are a great tool that produces results. We use races for most of our acceleration work, and we like to use heats like track meets, where the fastest guys are paired against each other, and the heats are evenly matched for competition purposes.

Getting the sport coaches involved will also increase the competitive atmosphere of any race. Our head coach will come out and call out winners—we want a fun, competitive environment that prepares the players for the stress of competition. Guys can’t hide in the heats: If they don’t give a good effort, they get exposed. We encourage side-betting and trash talk, which provides the workout with excitement and bragging rights for the day.

Video 3. Setting up races adds max effort to any sprint.

Recording

Another critical piece of our training is recording sprint times. Just like racing, being timed has been shown to increase intent. Timing also provides feedback, which reinforces that the training process is doing what is intended: getting the athletes faster. Tony Holler’s Record, Rank, and Publish mantra does wonders for effort and motivation. Timing gives the coaches the ability to self-audit the training program and make adjustments if there is no progress being seen.

Timing gives the coaches the ability to self-audit the training program and make adjustments if there is no progress being seen, says @CoachJoeyG. Share on X

How do the athletes know they are getting better if you can’t prove it? And an even better question, how do you know that your program works if you don’t test?

Having stations where timing gates are utilized helps coaches get everyone timed efficiently. Dashr can make recording efficient using their app, and Freelap is another timing system that gives coaches the ability to time a lot of athletes at one time. An inexpensive way to time a team is to use a tripod and slow-motion video, with apps such as Coach’s Eye and Dartfish Express giving the coach the ability to generate times. This method is time-intensive, but very effective in certain situations. Additionally, GPS systems like Catapult have allowed us to track mph and acceleration metrics.

Conclusion

Organizing a large group speed session can seem daunting, but as with anything, the preparation work that gets done beforehand makes all the difference. Have a clear vision on what you want to accomplish in the session. Progressions should build within the work as the intensity of the drills increases.

Give football coaches some eye candy by using subgroups and circuits, so that your speed workout has the feel of “grinding” even while providing the adequate amount of rest time. Incorporate races and timing into the workouts to drive intent and competitiveness. Speed can be the difference in games, so find ways to train it in any circumstances.

By programming our speed workouts this way, we were able to improve our power, acceleration, and max velocity—we dropped our average 20-yard dash times by .12 and increased our top speed by almost an entire mph over the course of a summer. Our position coaches have recognized their athletes are playing faster, and we have been more resilient to soft tissue injuries due to the exposure throughout the above-mentioned workouts.

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

We’ve entered the speed era of sports performance; however, we’ve also entered the era of data availability and athlete individualization. Coaches understand that technology can help target training to give each athlete what they specifically need to increase the odds of optimal adaptations for increasing speed. When strength training, you program based on percent of 1 rep max or specific velocity zones rather than putting arbitrary amounts of weight on the bar or using the same weight for everyone; the same concept applies to speed development and resisted sprinting.

Load-velocity profiling is how we stop guessing about how much resistance to use for each athlete in sprint training. It is a holistic assessment to describe an athlete’s ability to perform a certain exercise or movement, typically comparing two variables: in this case, load (resistance) and velocity. The relationship between load and velocity is negatively linear—as the load increases, sprinting velocity decreases.

Load-velocity profiling is how we stop guessing about how much resistance to use for each athlete in sprint training, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Instead of just doing a 1RM back squat, which only tests an athlete’s ability to squat against maximal loads, or one unresisted timed sprint at max velocity, a profile gives broader insight into their skill on that movement by using 3-5 data points. We can use this relationship to our advantage when programming to have individual athletes sprint at specific speeds to get the desired training adaptations. The catch, however, is that each athlete has their own specific relationship to how load affects their velocity.

*Note 1: This article is specifically about using the 1080 Sprint, but the concepts and principles about load-velocity profiling are universal and can be applied to any resisted sprint training.

*Note 2: I will say “yards” as that is how I determine distances when profiling and programming in training, but the 1080 Sprint measures distance in meters.

Linear Regression

A linear regression is a predictive model aimed not just at measuring the association of two variables, but how one can be used to predict the other. In this situation, if I know the load or velocity of a sprint, can I predict the other? Load-velocity profiling is collecting actual data points about the athlete’s load-velocity relationship when sprinting and using a linear regression to help predict everything else in between.

If we know what velocities we want, we can predict what loads to use to achieve those velocities. This is how the data gets turned into action, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

When individualizing resisted sprint training, the goal is to sprint at certain velocity decrements of the athlete’s fastest velocity. If we know what velocities we want, we can predict what loads to use to achieve those velocities. This is how the data gets turned into action. Each athlete has their own unique relationship of load and velocity and consequently their own regression. 

Acclimation to Resisted Sprinting

In order to get a reliable and valid profile, the athlete has to be familiar with the movement, technology, and resistance they will be performing against. Reliability is the consistency of the test and validity is whether the test actually assesses what you say it is measuring. At the beginning, the athlete will improve due to neuromuscular adaptations simply by becoming more familiar and proficient at that movement (think “newbie gains”); thus, comparison to future profiles is not as meaningful.

For those who have never experienced the feeling of sprinting against a 1080 Sprint with moderately high resistance (15+ kg)—it is quite the challenge. It is an extremely high quality and smooth resistance with the ability to go up to 30 kilograms, which is not for the faint of heart. Let’s just say a first attempt at heavy sprinting is not always pretty.

The athlete will get better at running against the 1080 Sprint the first few times without actually becoming “faster.” The addition of a familiarization session is not just to ensure the reliability and consequent validity of the profile, but also the most accurate pre- and post-test analysis and reflection on the training program. The athlete should be familiar with the 1080 Sprint and similar resistances they will be running against for the profile.

Velocities

We can break “load-velocity profile” into its components: specific “loads” (resistances) relative to the athlete’s fastest “velocities” at those loads. A fundamental part of load-velocity profiling is having the athlete’s truest max velocities at those loads.

The 1080 Sprint is extremely convenient for this because it automatically calculates the fastest 5 meters of every sprint. In the case of alternative methods of load-velocity profiling such as timing gates, you are assuming the athlete will reach their true max velocity within the gates based on how much distance you give them beforehand to accelerate. If it is too much distance, the athlete will be slowing down due to fatigue before the end of the gates; if it is too little distance, the athlete will be at sub-max velocities when they enter the gates.

The issue of having too much distance is mitigated by the 1080 Sprint calculating the fastest 5 meters regardless of where it occurs in the sprint. (However, the issue might arise from having too little distance, which does not allow the athlete to truly reach their max velocity at that load.)

“Peaking Out”

My colleagues and I use the term “peaking out” when there are at least 1-2 complete steps after the fastest 5 meters, which shows that the athlete’s velocity has truly “peaked” during the sprint. On the tablet of the 1080 Sprint, the fastest 5 meters will automatically be bolded, and it will turn a different color on the website. Figure 2 is an example of an athlete who has truly “peaked out” on all four sprints. Each “mountain” from bottom to bottom is a complete step. The first (top) sprint had 3.5 steps after the fastest 5 meters, the second had three, the third had 2.5, and the fourth (bottom) had eight.

In figure 3, would the 5-meter velocities have changed if the sprints were extended 5 more yards? Probably. Would they have changed a substantial amount to alter the profile? Maybe yes, maybe no. Was the athlete close enough to their max velocity? Not for a true load-velocity profile. Want to know the easiest way to leave no doubt that it was their true max velocity? Be certain they peaked out.

Want to know the easiest way to leave no doubt that it was their true max velocity? Be certain the athlete peaked out, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

It is important to note if the athlete “peaked out” or not because future reassessment of the profile might not reflect adaptations and changes in velocity from training, as the distances are not sufficient to reach max velocity. If that is the case, I would recommend adding 5 yards to every sprint and re-profiling the athlete the next training session. Additionally, comparing the profiles of athlete A, who “peaked out,” to athlete B, who did not, might not lead to the most accurate comparisons.

Protocols: Resistances and Distances

Now that we are all on the same page for what profiling is and why it is important, how do we actually do it? First, we pick which resistances to run against. Protocols recommended by sports scientist and resisted-sprint expert Dr. Micheál Cahill include:

• Four total sprints, all reaching true max velocity (aka “peaking out”).
• One unresisted sprint and three resisted sprints, with one of the resisted sprints being slower than a 50% velocity decrement (V_dec).¹

For determining the distances: In a full sprint, is there enough distance for the athlete to achieve max velocity and maintain it for 5 meters, then have one or two slower steps due to fatigue (“peak out”), but not have such an extended sprint distance to where the required rest would be excessive? There is definitely a sweet spot, and I have experimented with different combinations with the four sprints, from 30-25-20-15 yards to 30-25-20-20 yards to 35-30-25-20 yards (my recommendations are below).

How do you know where 50% V_dec is, and what resistance should you utilize for the last sprint? There are a few ways:

1. Do a lot of profiles and be able anecdotally to guess roughly where it is for each athlete (my protocol recommendations for general athlete skill levels are below).
2. Because load and velocity have a negatively linear relationship, you could likely guess after the first two sprints how many more kilograms you will need. If the athlete’s 5-meter velocity of the first sprint was 8.0 m/s at 1 kg and the second sprint was 6.75 m/s at 5 kg, you could reasonably assume that every 4 kg reduces velocity about 1.25 m/s. Nine kilograms would be 5.5 m/s and 13 kg would be 4.25 m/s, which is pretty close to 50% of 8.0 m/s (because 1 kg is essentially an unresisted sprint at max velocity). In that situation, continue with 4 kg increases.

Here are the three standard protocols that we use in our facility:

1. Beginner: 1 kg for 35 yards, 5 kg for 30 yards, 10 kg for 25 yards, 15 kg for 20 yards.

1. • Beginner males, beginner females, and intermediate females.

2. Intermediate: 2 kg for 35 yards, 8 kg for 30 yards, 14 kg for 25 yards, 20 kg for 20 yards.

1. • Intermediate males and advanced females.

3. Advanced: 3 kg for 35 yards, 10 kg for 30 yards, 17 kg for 25 yards, 24 kg for 20 yards.

1. • Advanced males.

The skill groups are recommended based on anecdotal evidence of what resistances their 50% V_dec usually calculate to. There will always be other factors, such as experience sprinting with the 1080 Sprint, body weight, and psychological and physical readiness to train, but those protocols are a great place to start.

“Intermediate” and “advanced” will mean different things to different coaches, but here is an example: Of the nine “advanced” female athletes I have profiled (three high school athletes committed to play in college, five college athletes, and one professional athlete), their profiles yielded an average 50% V_dec of 16.1 kg ± 1.7 (range: 13.8-19.2). With an average 50% V_dec of 16.1 kg and max of 19.2, the “intermediate” protocol would be the most appropriate.

Rest Intervals

To create a true load-velocity profile, you need to ensure that the athlete has recovered and is ready to achieve max velocity before each sprint. A very general rule of thumb for rest periods during speed development is one minute for every 10 yards. However, in the case of resisted sprinting, the same yardage could take twice as long, so that rule does not always apply.

Anecdotally, a minimum of two minutes’ rest between sprints might be the lower limit of adequate rest, with anything above three minutes yielding diminishing returns. As soon as the athlete finishes their sprint, unclips the belt of the 1080 Sprint, and starts walking back, I start the timer on my watch. When it gets to around 2:15 of rest, I have the athlete hop back in the belt and get ready to sprint. That gives us 2:30 of rest.

Whatever rest intervals you choose, try to keep it consistent for repeatable protocols across all your athletes and for retesting purposes, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

I am conscious that there is a fine line between keeping the flow of the session going (especially when profiling multiple athletes), resting to ensure full recovery, and maximizing your time coaching. But if you can get four high-quality resisted sprints in during 10 or 12 minutes while yielding a valid load-velocity profile, I believe that is an effective use of your time. Whatever rest intervals you choose, try to keep it consistent for repeatable protocols across all your athletes and for retesting purposes.

Calculating the Profile

Ever thought you would need to bring back that algebra you learned in middle school? Well, here it is! But this is at least a little more exciting because it has to do with resisted sprint training. Bring back those suppressed memories, because we are talking about linear regressions and the equation Y = M(X) + B.

Here is a cheat sheet for all the variables:

• Y = 5-meter velocity achieved during that sprint (m/s).
• M = slope, ability to sprint against resistance.
• X = load/resistance (kg).
• B = Y-intercept (when load is 0), athlete’s maximum 5-meter velocity (m/s).

M and B are automatically calculated from the regression, so you will be given an equation that looks something like this: Y = -0.1787(X) + 8.0251.

In resisted sprint training, we speak in terms of velocity decrement or reduction from the athlete’s max velocity. Similar to them squatting at 75% of their 1 rep max, they can sprint at 25% V_dec of their max velocity. Every athlete has their own unique equation and will have specific loads required to sprint at certain velocity decrements, which is how training is individualized.

Using algebra and knowing what velocity decrement and consequent actual velocity we want to sprint at (variable Y), we work backward to calculate the load (variable X) to put on the 1080 Sprint to achieve that velocity.

Let’s work through an example using the equation above. If 8.0251 is the max 5-meter velocity, we can calculate the following velocity decrements. Velocity decrement is how much slower from the fastest we are: 10% V_dec is 90% of the fastest, 25% V_dec is 75% of the fastest, 50% V_dec is 50% of the fastest.

• 10% V_dec = 8.0251 * 0.90 = 7.2226 m/s
• 25% V_dec = 8.0251 * 0.75 = 6.0188 m/s
• 50% V_dec = 8.0251 * 0.50 = 4.0126 m/s

Let’s rewrite the equation and work through a 25% V_dec:

• Y = M(X) + B
• Velocity sprinted at for 25% V_dec = slope (kg on 1080 Sprint) + max 5-meter velocity
• 6.0188 = -0.1787(X) + 8.0251
• -2.0063 = -0.1787(X)
• X = 11.2
• Kg on 1080 Sprint = 11.2

In order for the athlete to run at 25% V_dec and achieve a “peaked out” 5-meter velocity of 6.0188 m/s, the load on the 1080 Sprint should be 11.2 kg. Sometimes that number will exactly line up in real life, and it is pretty cool when it does, but humans are not machines or equations. There are multiple factors that could affect the velocity achieved when actually sprinting compared to the calculated: the athlete has improved and will reach a higher velocity, the athlete is fatigued during the session and it will be lower, or the distance was not long enough to peak out. Those are all factors to consider, and the athlete will be close to the calculated number, but that is how you take the guessing out of programming resistances (at least at the beginning).

Personally, I like doing this all in Microsoft Excel, but 1080 Motion has a load-velocity profile function built in. If you do it in Excel, I have an extensive YouTube video on how to do this for sprinting, lifting, and jumping here.

R² Value

The R² of a linear regression is the level of ability the equation has to predict the other variables. A high R² value means it was a reliable profile and fits the negatively linear load-velocity relationship extremely well, making it really good at predicting values based on the four sprints the athlete performed.

The average R² of 73 profiles I have administered across 55 different athletes is 0.992 ± 0.007 with a maximum of 1.000 and minimum of 0.968. R² values can range from 0 (no ability to predict) to 1 (perfect ability to predict). With only eight of the profiles (11%) being below 0.985, an R² of 0.985 is the threshold we use as a reliable profile. Within these 73 profiles, I have used a variety of protocols, including:

• Combinations of distances and resistances
• Assessing athletes from middle school to professional
• Whether it is the athlete’s first time on the 1080 Sprint
• Sometimes not achieving 50% V_dec
• Sometimes not being “peaked out”
• Sometimes using three or five data points

This is all in the process of learning and determining my consistent protocols and still getting an incredibly high R² value.

One of the reasons the R² value of the load-velocity profiles on the 1080 Sprint is very high is the fact that it automatically calculates the fastest 5 meters of every sprint. The 1080 Sprint is extremely effective at describing the relationship of load and velocity and consequently predicting the variables, but the question now becomes whether the protocols and sprints performed truly represent that relationship. Did the athlete “peak out” every sprint? Was it fatigue or effort that made the graph appear it was “peaked out”? Was one sprint slower than 50% V_dec? That is how a reliable profile becomes valid.

Programming

There are aspects of resisted sprint training that we know are associated with optimal loading zones.

• 0%-10% V_dec is the technical zone.
• 10%-40% V_dec is the speed-strength zone.
• 40%-60% V_dec is the power zone.¹
• 50% V_dec is about where max power is.²

Having a 1080 Sprint does not make you a good speed coach, and simply sprinting at certain velocity decrements will not guarantee the best speed improvements. You need a goal, a program, progressions, and coaching to help you get there. Load-velocity profiling just takes the GUESSING out of picking resistances; it does not write your programs or do the coaching for you.

Load-velocity profiling just takes the GUESSING out of picking resistance; it does not write your programs or do the coaching for you, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Here is an example of how you could program resistances into your sprint development:

1. Phase 1 (Skill Acquisition): resisted mechanics/technique drills at loads consistent with 10%-40% V_dec (4 x 10 yards), paired with contrast sprints at 0%-10% V_dec (4 x 15 yards).
2. Phase 2 (Speed-Strength Development): resisted sprints at 50% V_dec (4-6 x 10-15 yards).
3. Phase 3 (Speed-Realization): resisted sprints at 25% V_dec alternating with contrast sprints at 1 kg (3-4 rounds of one resisted sprint with one contrast sprint, 15-20 yards each).

Understanding what is high or low for the slope (M, the athlete’s ability to sprint against resistance) and the y-intercept (B, the athlete’s max velocity) can help determine where to start focusing training efforts to improve the profile. Additionally, tracking those variables through multiple profiles can provide insight into how the training is affecting the athlete’s performance.

Other Nuances

There are many other factors you also should take into consideration.

Coaching

This nuance is choosing whether or not to coach the athlete between sprints. If you give the athlete a cue between their first and second rep that helps them on their next sprint, it may affect their load-velocity profile for that day. I am not saying give your athlete zero feedback—profiling is a training session, and it should be used to get better—but you have to understand that coaching could affect the athlete’s sprinting ability from rep to rep. I have kept the tablet secret between sprints, not showing my athlete any data, and I have maximized the rest period coaching. There is no right or wrong on this one, just keep it consistent.

Fatigue

Did the athlete “peak out” because of fatigue or effort? Fatigue-wise, they are still trying as hard as possible, they just cannot maintain their max velocity. Effort-wise, they might have stopped trying before they crossed the finish line. Both fatigue and lack of effort will look the same on the graph.

I have seen athletes simply run to the line and stop, meaning they decelerated before the line instead of running through the line. They simply could not be motivated, or they were just not comfortable with a heavy resistance over a moderate distance. This is where you as a coach must decide from visually looking if they “peaked out” from effort or fatigue, which will affect whether it is a valid profile. Your eyes will help you out the most on this one.

Retesting

Load-velocity profiling is an assessment and can be used to track progress over time. How long do you expect it to take to achieve meaningful adaptations from training? Four weeks plus a deload? Do your training blocks typically last six weeks? What numbers will you focus on improving the most? This will all depend on your goals and programming.

It is extremely important to make sure you get a valid profile the first time—that way your protocols do not need to be modified in the future, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Second, when retesting, you should use the exact same protocols to allow for the most accurate comparison. That is why it is extremely important to make sure you get a valid profile the first time—that way your protocols do not need to be modified in the future.

Familiarization

 Although this pertains to a prior section, including this now will make much more sense with your newly acquired information. Anecdotally, I had nine high school athletes perform two load-velocity profiles 48 hours apart. Some athletes had experience using the 1080 Sprint, while for others it was their first time.

For all variables going into and calculated from the profiles, using a paired (dependent samples) t-test, no variables were statistically significantly different from the first profile to the second besides 5-meter velocity at 10 kg (p < 0.05). The variables analyzed were 5-meter velocities at 1 kg, 5 kg, 10 kg, and 15 kg; the slope (M); max velocity (B); R² of the regression; and predicted loads to run at 10% V_dec, 25% V_dec, and 50% V_dec. With that said, no two profiles were perfectly the same and this caused different resistances to be programmed; however, the average difference for resistances between profiles for 10% V_dec, 25% V_dec, and 50% V_dec was 0.2 kg, 0.5 kg, and 1.0 kg, respectively.

Exceptions

I have also seen many profiles that look like this where the athlete was not “peaked out” for the first two sprints, but “peaked out” for the last two (see figure 4 below). What do you do? Is it invalid? Do you add 5 more yards to the first two sprints but leave the distances for the last two next time? Probably not.

This could mean one of three things:

1. They were not given enough rest and were tired for the last two sprints.
2. They stopped trying for the last two sprints.
3. They are better at running against light resistance and needed more distance for the first two sprints.

I believe it is important to keep the changes in resistance and distance consistent between sprints to achieve a well-rounded profile. It is important to know what a typical profile looks like, so you are aware of when you need to intervene and manage during the sprint, whether that means staying the course, instructing to remember to finish all the way through the line, etc.

Specificity

Although these concepts are universal for training and load-velocity profiling, these numbers are specific to the 1080 Sprint, my coaching style, my programming, and my athletes. You can apply all of this in your setting, but there should be a critical period when you first learn and experiment to see what YOUR numbers look like. Go experiment. Mess around with different resistances and distances and calculate the profiles for your own athletes to see where the 10% V_dec, 25% V_dec, and 50% V_dec are.

Conclusion

Load-velocity profiling on the 1080 Sprint removes the guesswork when assigning resistance, gives consistent assessment and reassessment protocols, and provides objective feedback. Capitalizing on this opportunity to individualize training will help you do your job as a coach when developing speed. Although it takes time to learn this process, the main point to remember is that all nuances and factors come back to ensuring the athlete hits their true max velocity at each resistance and sprint.

As with all sport science, do not load-velocity profile your athletes just because you can. You should have a very solid idea of how the data will directly become action, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

As with all sport science, do not load-velocity profile your athletes just because you can. You should have a very solid idea of how the data will directly become action. The specifics can change and get sorted out later, but knowing “this profile will dictate what resistances I will use” or “this will be my main objective assessment of progress for the next X weeks based on these two variables” is incredibly more beneficial than “I want to see where my athlete is at.”

Although load-velocity profiling is an assessment tool, the same rules of coaching still apply. As soon as you hit start on the 1080 Sprint’s tablet, watch the athlete throughout the entirety of their sprint. Once that is all done, then see what the graphs and numbers say.

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. Cahill, Micheál. (2020, December). “A targeted approach to resisted sled training for speed development: Assess, prescribe and coach.” Track Football Consortium. https://trackfootballconsortium.com/tfc-2020/

2. Cross, MR, Brughelli M, Samozino P, Brown SR, and Morin JB. “Optimal loading for maximizing power during sled-resisted sprinting.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2017;12:1069-1077.

A rampant and erroneous concept in the speed community is that athletes have to run at maximum or near-maximum velocity in order to get faster. At surface level, the concept makes sense; it seems intuitive, akin to the thought that one must lift heavy in order to get stronger. But neither of these ideologies are accurate. As we know, submaximal lifts indeed can improve maximal strength. Likewise, submaximal sprints indeed can improve maximum speed.

Can athletes get faster by running fast, a la Feed the Cats? Yes, of course.

Is this the only way to improve speed? No.

Tension vs. Peacefulness

Watch the faces of the world’s greatest sprinters. More times than not, they look relaxed. Oftentimes, you’ll see jaws flopping about, that’s how loose they are. Too much tension hurts speed. Olympic lifters know this—in the Olympic lifts, athletes must alternate between tension and relaxation at very fast rates.

Too much tension hurts speed, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Such is the reality of sprinting. We call it “coordination,” referring to the synchronization of muscles turning on and off at certain points in the sprint cycle. It’s harmonious, really (or should be). The faster the hip flexors “turn off,” the faster hip flexion forces are diminished, allowing the hip extensors to pull the thigh down towards the ground more quickly and forcefully.

It’s not unlike tug-of-war. If one side suddenly lets the rope go, the rope goes flying in the other direction. When one set of muscles “let go,” the set of muscles on the other side are no longer opposed, so the leg goes flying in the other direction quickly.

The efficiency of this reciprocal inhibition is, in my mind, a key determinant of stride frequency. My brain thinks in analogies, and the image of two loggers in the 1800s cutting down a tree with a two-man saw comes to mind.

To maximize how fast the saw moves, only one side of it should be pulled at a time. If the loggers on both ends of the saw pull at the same time, obviously the speed of the blade and the efficiency of the cut will be compromised.

Point is, being overly tense hurts speed. To maximize speed, muscle groups must contract powerfully, relax rapidly, and do so at the right times. Submaximal sprints help program that.

To maximize speed, muscle groups must contract powerfully, relax rapidly, and do so at the right times, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

You Want Me to Run…Peacefully?

Credit to Stu McMillan of Altis for the cue “peaceful” in relation to sprinting. He discusses this concept in the Altis Foundation course.

We met in person at the 2021 US Olympic Trials, and this concept came up in discussion. One of the athletes he was coaching was stuck in the 10.2–10.3 second range. Stu went “all-in,” as he said, on submax runs. They went several months without hitting max velocity in training.

Imagine that: a 100m sprint athlete not hitting max velocity in training for months on end. Yet, he eventually PR’d and went sub 10.1.

Stu wrote an e-book about the process. You can find it here.

I’ve had similar breakthroughs with the athletes I work with (for the record, they are mostly high school athletes and not Olympic hopefuls or Olympians like Stu trains). I record flying 10s with a Freelap system, and some athletes—not all, but some—actually PR while sprinting at what they perceive as submaximal efforts.

To be clear on this point—I’m saying that I’ve instructed athletes to run at “85-90% effort” (not 85-90% max speed, but effort) while focusing on running peacefully and fluidly, and as a result they’ve PR’d in their flying 10. In other words: they ran their fastest times ever while feeling like they were only giving 90%. Anecdotal, sure, but this serves as evidence that there’s something to the concept of running peacefully and fluidly.

I hesitate to use the word “relaxed,” because sprinting is not relaxing. It is fast and violent, yet most effective with a calm, present, and focused mind.

Sprinting is fast and violent, yet most effective with a calm, present, and focused mind, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Hence, peaceful.

It’s the mentality I imagine the Samurai had going into battle. I have to think they didn’t psych themselves up and ask their brethren to slap them in the face before entering a duel. Rather, I envision them as calm and methodical, yet precise, decisive, graceful, and incredibly violent with their movements when the time came to strike.

To me, this mental state is the antithesis of trying too hard. Muscling through a sprint is a great way to run slow. The Samurai approach is the path to speed.

Doesn’t make sense to you? Don’t worry, it didn’t to me at first, either.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Allyson Felix (@allysonfelix)

Image 2. The great Olympian Alison Felix, beautifully demonstrating what it looks like to run fast while staying calm and peaceful.

Cueing Peacefulness

When describing the concept to athletes, I usually start with a question and a charades-like demonstration. “Which do you think is a faster way to run: running nice, smooth, and fluid…” (demonstrating these qualities) “…or, muscling your way through a sprint?” Most athletes recognize that smooth and fluid is the way to go.

After that, I’ll introduce the word “peaceful” as distinct from “relaxed.” Many athletes have been told to run relaxed; however, that word may strike an emotional response similar to lethargy in ways that “peaceful” perhaps does not. Maybe this is a matter of semantics and preference, but I feel peaceful is a different mode of operation than relaxed, and that peaceful captures the state that facilitates speed better than relaxed does.

Peaceful is a different mode of operation than relaxed, and peaceful captures the state that facilitates speed better than relaxed does, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Nonetheless, asking athletes to find a smooth and fluid sprint tends to work. “Clear your brain and run” works for those who are more in-tuned with their mind. All in all, though, it takes time and reps. Very few get it on rep one. It’s a difficult concept to understand cognitively, even more difficult to execute.

But when athletes do get it, there’s an “aha” moment. They feel it immediately and can tell the difference. They’ll often report the run felt smoother and more graceful. Like it felt easier. That’s the good stuff. That’s the gold. That’s the sensation athletes need to maintain during maximum efforts to truly reach their peak velocities.

Programming Submax Sprints

Metabolic purposes aside, I see two main uses for submaximal sprints:

1. To create technical changes (teaching technique)
2. To empower athletes to learn how to run peacefully

Although “peacefulness” is not a kinematic parameter, I do think of it as part of sprint technique. Submaximal sprinting allows athletes to focus on things other than running fast, like technique. When it is time to run at max speed, it’s definitely not time to think about how you’re doing it. The time to do that is when you’re running slowly.

When it is time to run at max speed, it’s definitely not time to think about how you’re doing it, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Thus, submax sprints.

Before actually sprinting, however, it can be valuable to practice the concept with drills first. I’ve found dribbles and switching drills (such as boom booms) with an emphasis on smoothness and fluidity to be a helpful primer to actually running.

The facility I work at has 63m of track, so I am constrained with what I can do with athletes. The workouts proposed below are a reflection of that. If I had more space, I would use it. Adapt for your space as you see fit.

Flying Sprints at Submax Efforts

If you have a bone to pick because flying sprints by definition mean max speed in your book…sue me. If you’re new to the term, a flying sprint is a slow build up run (not an explosive start), a short section of what is typically a maximum velocity sprint, followed by a slow, gradual deceleration. It’s a typical workout for max speed development.

In this case, it’s just as described above, but I instruct athletes to build up to a designated percentage of effort, and hold that speed through the end point (usually a cone).

I typically start by requesting 80% effort. If the film looks good and if athletes report feeling confident and comfortable, I’ll bump up in 5% increments. This style of sprinting is also conducive to working on other kinematic variables as well.

In this protocol, when you choose to ask athletes to go 100% is up to you as a coach. In my experience, athletes who are more intense and stiff—or who come across as (or actually are) angry all the time—tend to need more practice with submax sprints before the mind state starts to stick.

Athletes who are more intense and stiff tend to need more practice with submax sprints before the mind state starts to stick, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

My guess is that, in general, the concept of slowing down and achieving a peaceful mind is not attractive or easily achieved psychologically for these types of people. I doubt social media and the rest of modern existence has lent itself towards freeing the mind.

When reviewing film, look for tension in the neck, face, and hands. If you see hands that are sort of floppy, that’s a sure sign that athletes are on the right track. We may not want to see floppy hands when athletes are attempting full speed sprints, but when intentionally going slow, I don’t think it’s a bad thing.

In my experience, more times than not, you will find that actual speeds are higher than athletes’ perceived effort level. For instance, I often notice athletes running at 90 or even 95%+ of their best 10m fly time during reps when they report 80 or 85% effort. I always take the time to communicate this: “You felt like you were giving 85%, but you were actually running at 95% of your top speed. That seems like a good thing, right? Imagine what will happen when you master this smoothness during your actual 100% effort!”

Alternatively, you may challenge your athletes to hit a certain time that you have predetermined (say, 85 or 90% of their PR). I first heard this concept from Sam Portland when he appeared on episode 141 on the Just Fly Performance Podcast. He calls it speed gate golf: challenging athletes to hit certain times as opposed to percent efforts.

Again, in my experience, when athletes get the peaceful concept down, they report lower perceived effort than expected from their times. In other words, they’ll feel like they’re giving 70% effort while hitting 85% of their max speed.

Maybe the relationship between perceived effort and actual speed isn’t 1:1, so perhaps it’s to be expected that these won’t match up. I’m open to that. But honestly, if it boosts athletes’ confidence and provides enhanced expectancies (a la Gabriele Wulf), I’m OK with it and will continue wielding that language to their advantage.

Alternating Flying Sprints

Alternating between a submax and a maximal sprint gives athletes the opportunity to first feel the smooth, fluid, peaceful run and then to incorporate that into an actual full speed effort. I use this method with athletes who seem to have the concept down—they are beyond the learning stage and now need practice incorporating the technique into their “normal.”

Pro tip: film, film, film. Compare the submax to the maximal sprint. They should look the same: beautiful. If technique goes to hell when an athlete puts the pedal to the metal, they may not be ready to give 100% effort yet and may need more time at submax speeds to hone technique.

One athlete I work with improved his flying 10 PR from 1.01s to 0.97s (22.15mph to 23.06mph) using this method. That’s a pretty big jump, and he did it, in my opinion, by finding that peacefulness and fluidity.

In and Outs

I’ve also heard them called floating sprints or re-accelerations, but Al Vermeil calls them in and outs, so I tend to call them that, too.

An in and out is a maximal sprint for X distance, a maintenance sprint by which speed doesn’t change (think cruise control) for X distance, then full speed to the end.

On my 63m track, I usually do a 10m sprint, 20m “float” or cruise control, then a 15m sprint. On a full track, you may do a 15–20m initial sprint, a longer float phase—say, 40–60m—followed by a 20–30m full speed sprint to the finish.

This is also reserved for athletes who have the basic concept down. The goal is to achieve the smoothness going into the float phase, hold it, then maintain as the athlete begins accelerating again towards max speed.

Elastic vs. Strength-Based Athletes: Does it Matter?

The athlete who went from a 1.01 to a .97s flying 10 is highly elastic. The kid hasn’t touched a weight in years (don’t ask). He’s one of those naturally gifted athletes who can pogo through the roof. He’s also highly competitive, so he got down on himself and tried harder when his flying 10 time wasn’t what he wanted. As a result of trying harder, he ran slower, spiraling him into a downward cycle of trying harder, running slower, trying harder, running slower.

For him, I think trying harder meant muscling it more.

Yet, when he released himself from that mentality and ran peacefully, his time dropped significantly. This makes me wonder: do elastic athletes respond better to this type of focus than strength-based athletes do?

I do think that even strength-based (as opposed to elastic) sprinters are at their fastest when they find that peacefulness, based on the physiological rationale presented earlier regarding stride frequency. But I wonder if elastic athletes have more to gain from finding that rhythm than their strength-based counterparts.

In other words, maybe muscling it holds an elastic sprinter back more than it would a strength-based one. If that’s true—and I don’t know if it is—then maybe it warrants spending more time working this concept with elastic athletes.

Maybe muscling it holds an elastic sprinter back more than it would a strength-based one, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Running Slow to Run Fast

I reject the notion that athletes have to sprint maximally or near maximally to get faster. Not only are submaximal sprints excellent avenues by which to make technical changes, they are also highly appropriate for learning, understanding, internalizing, and then realizing the necessary mind state to reach one’s true maximum velocity potential.

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