Blog

While scrolling through social media during our final “dead period” prior to the official start of the fall season here in South Carolina, I ran across a quote that initially made me laugh. After a moment to think about it, though, the quote gave me pause.

“Get ready high school strength coaches , it is almost football season, or as we know it ‘we just need to be in better shape’ season.”

While I had a good laugh at this, I decided against sharing the post—instead, that dig at the traditional imperative in high school football programs inspired me to sit down and begin writing, for the first time in a while. After giving further thought to the statement, the question it raised for me was first, what are we doing here? And then, more specifically, why do we, as sports performance coaches, often struggle to successfully get our message out to high school football coaches?

The fact is, most of the back and forth on the topic of “conditioning” at the high school level seems to revolve more around the egos and ambiguous traditions of the adults having the debate than the actual evidence of how to properly proceed. We can all agree that we want what’s best for the athletes—with that being the case, why do we have this frequent divide on what we believe is best practices to lead us to that end?

What We Know to Be True

This article is not about how or how not to “condition” your athletes or about sports-specific energy systems. I will, however, use this topic as the base example of my overarching point: If there is a bigger failure in communication in the athletic world than the one between strength and conditioning coaches and high school sport coaches, I haven’t seen it.

If there is a bigger failure in communication in the athletic world than the one between strength and conditioning coaches and high school sport coaches, I haven’t seen it, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

I know, there are situations in which everybody is on the same page, but that is an exception and not a rule. Even if your head coach “gets it,” not everyone on the staff does. It’s true—from football to lacrosse to soccer to field hockey to any sport you can name, there are sport coaches using flawed training methods with their athletes when it comes to the optimal way to “condition” or get in shape. Often, exercises and schemes are so far from optimal we can call them pointless. That can’t be denied, yet, it is denied daily, by sport coaches who continue to prescribe training that does not have much (if any) transfer to making their athletes play better.

While part of that responsibility falls on those individual sport coaches, we in the athletic development community need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves if we are also a big part of the problem. Let’s take a step back and look at the validity of the initial statement that broke me out of my writer’s block:

“Get ready high school strength coaches , it is almost football season, or as we know it ‘we just need to be in better shape’ season.”

That is absolutely the perception that a high percentage of programs will have in the first few weeks of camp this fall. Consquently, they will run a two-hour practice in which GPS data can (or would) show many of the athletes covering 2+ miles. After this, the coach will then have the players take off their helmets and shoulder pads and run slowly back and forth across the field until everyone is wheezing and dripping with sweat. There will be a 350-pound 15-year-old sliding his feet at 3 mph for 45 seconds after the others finish, just trying not to pass out while the other players and coaches will holler encouragement to “not quit” and so on.

If you played or coached football, you know this exact scene: When the poor guy does finish (and almost passes out), there will be shouts of how “mentally tough” that made the team. Inevitably, a coach will tell the kids “this is how champions are made,” and the physically spent group of young men will drag themselves off the field.

The problem is, anyone that has any level of understanding of human energy systems knows that nothing that took place after the pads came off helped make the players better at football—in fact, it probably made them worse. You must ask yourself:

• Why would sport coaches allow this to take place?
• Do we honestly believe that any coach shows up at practice and says “let’s do something completely counterproductive today”?

No, they do not. They are doing the things that their experience and background has made them believe are, in fact, best practices.

From an athletic development perspective, we understand that “in shape” most likely isn’t the issue and conditioning level is unlikely to be a limiting factor in on-field performance for most athletes. The question we need to pose, then, is: What does the athlete need to be in shape for? A marathon or a football game?

At the high school level, if the athlete has participated in the off-season, there is almost a 0% chance they are not in playing shape. Think about this for just a second—many high school athletes have “spring practice.” That’s four weeks of football practice. They then go into the summer program. Lifting, running, and jumping 3-5 times a week for two months. Add in 7-on-7 games, summer basketball leagues, and the reality that they are resilient teenagers…and it’s basically a physical impossibility that conditioning is a limiting factor to performance. The limiting factor is they have not played football.

At the high school level, if the athlete has participated in the off-season…it’s basically a physical impossibility that conditioning is a limiting factor to performance, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

The only stress or stimulus that is going to cause the adaptations needed for playing actual football is playing actual football. Factors that are hard to “condition” for but act to inhibit peak performance—such as the heat, longer practices in full equipment, the increased sport skill tasks that are being required, the mental fatigue of being coached at a higher level, etc.—are all elements that the athletes must adapt to during this time. Athletes who look sluggish in the August heat are not in need of pointless running—they need more football with less fatigue to allow them to be physically and physiologically recovered.

Open a book on the human energy system—then, take a stopwatch and watch a football game. Time the work-to-rest periods of each player during that game. Compare the two to see what type of conditioning will transfer to the sport. It’s not a huge mystery, yet sport coaches in many instances deny that evidence in favor of anecdotal experience and tradition. Despite the desire to win games and do the best they can to prepare their athletes, some still choose protocols that don’t have a high level of transfer based on the specific adaptations of the imposed demands of the protocol.

Why is this?

In my opinion, it has a lot to do with the anecdotal, we won games doing it thought process. It’s very easy to look at wins and losses and lose sight of the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Coaches may look at in-game performance metrics, and if they outperformed their opponents, use that as “evidence” in support of their standard pre-season conditioning grind. The truth is, of course, it could be a matter of just having a larger team (and thus fresher players), a more talented team, a better team culture, or maybe having a more effective S&C program developing their athletes independent of on-field conditioning.

A Breakdown in Communication

While our message has changed the way some coaches do things, there are still too many cases in which it has not. Here is another fact: The sport coach and the athletic development coach both have the same end goal in mind—having athletes who perform to the best of their abilities. If both coaches have the same mission, why is there often such a disconnect? Education and knowledge? Absolutely factors. Interest level? Probably a factor as well—some sports coaches just don’t have the same interest in the physical development side as they do in the technical and tactical. The list could go on and on.

Within the S&C community, however, we must shoulder part of the responsibility for this communication breakdown. How are the things that science tells us are true about the human body and how it works able to be ignored or denied? It is clear that there is a message problem. My contention is that a large part of these issues fall back on the athletic development/strength and conditioning community because of our behavior and actions toward each other. The more we foster an atmosphere of teaching and learning, of cooperation and discourse, the more our evidence-based influence will be accepted over anecdotal, tradition-based beliefs.

The more we foster an atmosphere of teaching & learning, cooperation & discourse, the more our evidence-based influence will be accepted over anecdotal, tradition-based beliefs, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

Returning to my original inspiration for writing this article, while there’s a good laugh to be had from that social media post, it isn’t the ideal way to communicate a message. Similarly, a friend of mine once said: When a sports coach says an athlete is not *strong enough*, what they are really telling us is they don’t know how to express the limiting factor in the athlete’s play—so *strong* becomes the word of choice.

Instead of taking offense to that or taking to Twitter to bash the sports coach, let’s find ways to ask the right questions to find out what the issue is. Maybe it is strength. That’s the easy fix. Maybe it’s mobility that limits the expression of the athlete’s strength. Whatever the case, let’s put our brains together and find out how we can help our athletes.

The Trust Process

We have to remember that WE are the support staff—our job is to develop an evidence-based map dictated by evaluating the needs of the athletes. We can create the map, have a plan on how to get the athlete where they need to be, and have a scientific path ready for the sports coach, but they still have to make the decision to follow it.

To get on the same page, we need to build relationships that will allow for an education process to slowly but surely develop. Would you trust a person you had a poor relationship with to provide the directions to a very important destination? No, because you don’t trust them!

In my current situation, I have worked hard to earn the trust of our head coaches. While there may be times they still do things I would not necessarily recommend, for the most part there is a level of trust, so they know the map I provide is one they can follow (and 95% of the time, they defer to me in my areas of expertise). That took a lot of hard work, understanding, time, and, frankly, a real attitude adjustment on my part. I had to learn that browbeating and debating was not an effective tool to show the coaches why my map was one to trust.

I had to learn that browbeating and debating was not an effective tool to show the coaches why my map was one to trust, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

Finding common ground, using common verbiage, presenting relevant data, and explaining the “why” of everything we do are all much more effective at building rapport. I had to remember that ego was a map to nowhere. Understanding, flexibility, and patience are all better directions to how to use that map we developed.

Each of us has to take the responsibility to not only develop trust within our athletic department but be aware of how we present ourselves as representatives of the S&C community. We must take responsibility for the message breakdown and do our part to build a feeling of trust and understanding with the sport coaching community, which we have not yet reached.

Be a Teacher

Think about the best teachers you’ve had and those who have influenced you in your career. Then, think about the type of relationship you had with that person. Was it adversarial? Probably not—it was likely based on trust and the knowledge that the teacher had a deep interest in your development. Our relationship with sport coaches on both a micro and macro level needs to be more characteristic of this.

I’ve quoted Coach Boyle before, and I will paraphrase him here: What we do in any single moment in time is what we believe to be best practices. Coaches are the same. If they do something less than optimal in the realm of conditioning or training, it’s not because they believe it will be ineffective; it’s because they expect it to work. You are the expert in the field—it’s your responsibility to find a way to package an educational and behavior-changing message that will help the sports coach gain a higher level of understanding in evidence-based best practices. It may be a subtle hint, or it may be a flood of technology that opens the communication pathway that leads to that understanding.

It’s your responsibility to find a way to package an educational and behavior-changing message that will help the sports coach gain a higher level of understanding in evidence-based best practices. Share on X

We need to teach, we need to lead, we need to learn to ask the right questions to unlock that trust and build the type of relationship that will get everyone on the same page.

How It Works

I work with a self-proclaimed old-school head football coach who, over several years, has developed complete trust in my expertise. We have a great relationship. That doesn’t mean he won’t do what he thinks is best from time to time, and that doesn’t mean we don’t disagree from time to time. That’s always going to happen. The key is sharing your “why” and expressing how that “why” will actually improve sport performance.

At the same time, you must be able to accept the fact that, regardless of that explanation, they may want to do something different. When that happens, take a step back and find a way to get it done in the most optimal way possible, while fulfilling what is requested of you. Learn to compromise within the compromise.

For example, when I found out two weeks ahead of time that our freshmen would be tested in the back squat, I said “okay” despite my initial hesitations. Then, a few days later, I went back and discussed his expectations of how we would handle “technical failure.” As it turns out, he was very receptive to my ideas. We had our max day, everyone was happy, and another level of trust and cooperation was added to our relationship.

Remember—the head coach is the head coach, and we are support staff (know our role). What this means is I draw the map and he trusts me enough to follow it. We recognize and respect each other’s roles and areas of expertise, and it works. That is because we both recognize that it’s not about us. We are both in our position to serve our student-athletes. We work together to make sure we are both doing the best we can for our players.

Bottom line: If an athletic department has growth-minded sport coaches who are experts in their field matched with a highly qualified, expert strength and conditioning professional, the student-athletes will not only perform at an optimal level, they will be healthier and more productive. Yet, in many instances, sports coaches do not see this as a truth. From the S&C side, what we need to do is work together as a whole to develop trust and foster relationships with our partners in the sports coaching side. Remember, it’s not about us.

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

If you were asked what muscles your eyes are primarily made up of, could you answer without Google? Simple enough question, right? Maybe right now you are looking left, right, up, and down, probably thinking about how all the type 2 fibers that make up your eyes are helping you do that.

At the same time, though, our eyes need to see and provide us with information for long periods of time. They need to remain open to do this yet blink quickly when necessary to reset. With all the quick movements, like blinking, it still would seem to be predominantly quick twitch based. However, could those long-duration uses serve to show otherwise?

Regardless of whether you’ve figured out the answer to the eye question, we’ll come back to it later. Clearly, the eye shows the need for all systems to work together for both short- and long-duration movements, just like how all energy systems need to work together and cannot be treated entirely in isolation, independent of each other.

Many have looked at sprinting in a similar fashion. Max speed doesn’t last beyond five or six seconds, so why sprint for any longer than that? Anaerobic systems are the only energy systems being used then, so why do we need to focus on other energy systems? Most sports actions don’t occur at submaximal effort, so the focus for everything sprint related should be all-out and with good rest. And the kicker—these sport actions and plays tend not to occur for longer than that 5- to 6-second time span, so there’s a high-enough rest:work ratio anyway.

While those arguments may all sound good, it can be quite easy to poke some holes in those claims. While maximum speed may only be held for 2-3 seconds, speed endurance—the ability to hold speed as long as possible and delay deceleration—can be crucial, as numerous plays occur for more than three seconds in sports. Although fewer occur at submax than at maximal effort, shouldn’t an increased recovery ability be something to look for, especially since energy systems all work harmoniously with one another as opposed to only working one at a time? And if and when the worst-case scenario occurs, all should be prepared to succeed at that point.

While it may not seem intuitive to train slower in order to gain an advantage, tempo has a place for almost all athletes, says @sgfeld27. Share on X

Bearing this in mind, when working with team sport athletes, using tempo sprints as part of training can have great benefits. While it may not seem intuitive to train slower in order to gain an advantage, tempo has a place for almost all athletes. While Ryan Banta has already shown how tempo training can be used for sprinters and Mike Whiteman has discussed why tempo is great for sprint ability, let’s really dive in to understand how we can use this method to an advantage with baseball players.

Technique and Rhythm

The benefits of sprinting and its effects on the central nervous system and overall speed cannot be overstated; attempting to run at maximal speed, however, is no small task. Because of the inherent nature of attempting to run as fast as possible, there are drawbacks. For instance, technique will likely not remain perfect or even close to it for whoever is sprinting, especially if they are not a trained sprinter. In turn, relaxation can also be lost in this attempt at maximal output.

Enter tempo training.

There is more opportunity to view technique and rhythm when slowed down than when the aim is solely full speed. Rather than running at maximal speeds, depending on the intent of the tempo on a given day, athletes can be going anywhere from 65%-90% effort and/or speed. In these speed ranges, homing in on technique, rhythm, and relaxation—and truly coaching it up—can be the primary focus.

Enter tempo training: There is more opportunity to view technique and rhythm when slowed down than when the aim is solely full speed, says @sgfeld27. Share on X

Forgive me as I digress, but I believe there is a necessary connection to make here between sprinting and lifting. Although they are not the same, there are some parallels. I find it stunning that some coaches will allow sprints to be used when they are ONLY fully max effort and/or max speed. When athletes are in a weight room, are they just in there to max out, whether it’s a one rep max or a five rep max? Or is the weight thoughtfully and carefully programmed? Hopefully, these answers don’t need to be provided to be known.

Furthermore, when athletes do max out, how much are we coaching them up for technique compared to when they are lifting submaximal loads? Maybe there is a reason maxing out seems to occur less and less often in programming for athletes (could an ever-improving use of velocity-based training metrics be part of the cause?). And while other accessory exercises help supplement our abilities on lifts where we may max out, they are just that—supplemental—in the same way that sprint drills are supplemental to sprints.

If we use velocity-based training metrics in the weight room, but agree that sprinting is the true means of velocity-based training, then it seems we have a big gray area to fill in. While the weight room can provide us with peak and average speeds in the 0.3-3 m/s range, sprints at the absolute most elite of elite speeds are about 12 m/s. A gap from 3 to 12 is far greater than a range of just 0.3 to 3. Even if we cap team sport athletes between 9 m/s and 11 m/s rather than using 12, the gap remains fairly unchanged.

Part of what makes tempo a great tool is that it fills in the gap of speed that is left if we only chase max velocity sprinting and weight room-based velocity. The gap that was about 3-9 m/s narrows to the 3-5 m/s range when we incorporate tempo running. When we use 65%-90% and program tactfully, all of a sudden, the ability to make meaningful technical improvements in sprinting becomes far easier.

Part of what makes tempo a great tool is that it fills in the gap of speed that is left if we only chase max velocity sprinting and weight room-based velocity, says @sgfeld27. Share on X

Using submaximal paces can help in both a straight line and an arced trajectory. For any athlete, the ability to improve technique should absolutely help diminish the risk of injury while sprinting. For baseball, learning better mechanics in both planes translates right to field work. As athletes develop better technique, speed development becomes easier and far more fluid and relaxed. Learning how to find the feel of a certain percent effort or speed can help make learning to use specific speeds much more effortless.

As players constantly throttle through different speeds in games, the ability to own those speeds and techniques outside of games is highly important and gives a big reward at a minimal risk.

Planning for the Worst-Case Scenario

While we do a great job in reverse engineering sporting demands to prepare our athletes with complete holistic programming, I believe that preparing for the worst-case scenario is often an overlooked consideration. Maybe I am wrong, and it is perhaps just not spoken of as much. (I thank Dan Howells for adding this concept to my thought process in programming.)

So, what is it that makes tempo training a way to help plan for the possibility of a worst-case scenario occurring?

Within baseball, there are a few different ways to define what the worst-case scenario may be. From a general fitness and heart rate standpoint, being trapped in the sun and draining heat of summer during a long inning is a potential problem. What happens when you can’t get water, hide in the shade, or take a seat on the bench because your team just can’t get the other team out? Sure, hydration plays a factor here, but regardless, if you are not in decent enough shape to control breathing and heart rate for a long time frame, can you still be in an optimal spot? What if you are the pitcher, and it’s a long, 30+ pitch inning for you at this point? While the sport is primarily anaerobic based, there is still clearly a need for an aerobic base due to potentially long innings.

On the flip side, offensive players may have to make repeated sprint efforts numerous times in a short period, depending on how the inning is going. Especially if you have a speedy base runner at bat or on base, base stealing, hit and run plays, and extra base hits are all possible. All these situations mean guys will be sprinting anywhere from 10 to 120 yards in any given situation, and while they may not always reach max velocity, they also in all likelihood will not always have proper rest time with 30 seconds between pitches.

As with Zach Dechant’s example situation, 93% is not only barely above intensive tempo pace but also not quite max velocity. This is not to say maximum effort or intent is not present, but we must understand the demands to prepare for in a worst-case scenario. Yes, we must be ready for high-speed running, but we also need to have the ability to either hold near-max speed for a sustained time or repeat efforts on short rest too. Only running maximum velocity or intent on proper rest will miss the boat on this.

Finally, because baseball is an outdoor sport, the weather has a big effect on scheduling. It is an uncontrollable aspect that can wreak havoc on a schedule if the weather is bad for any period of time. Double headers and postponements are not uncommon as a result, and with those automatically come extra innings on any given day. On those days, guys have to be ready to make more plays no matter what, and more pitchers than usual will likely be used—meaning they also must be ready for shorter recovery before they pitch next. Without training geared toward this, we can expect long days to end with less-than-ideal results.

Worst-case scenarios are different from sport to sport, but the principles remain the same—as such, tempo training provides an excellent tool to ensure the preparation is met within baseball. Share on X

Worst-case scenarios are different from sport to sport, but the principles remain the same—as such, tempo training provides an excellent tool to ensure the preparation is met within baseball.

Off-Season Preparation

As with plyometrics, tempo has both extensive and intensive options. When it comes to off-season preparation, extensive helps prepare for more intensive work down the road. Furthermore, using extensive tempo from the start of the off-season provides an opportunity to build workload and tolerance.

If we are to adequately prepare our athletes for the long season, we must work them above the levels they will be worked during the season. Using tempo as a base provides an opportunity for numerous ground contacts that will quickly ramp up the moment spring training begins. This includes all contacts—those we focus on and those we don’t always think of as important—all the time just spent in cleats, shagging balls during batting practice, moving from field to field, etc. The contacts are endless, and as such, we must have proper preparation. Without it comes higher potential for injuries.

While tempo training may not be the top priority for a baseball player, even in the off-season, mixing it in correctly will pay a big dividend once the season begins. If we do not use it successfully during the off-season, how can we plan to use it properly in season?

Recovery and Peripheral Adaptations

Whereas sprint training aims to tax the central nervous system while building up max velocity and/or acceleration speeds (depending on the phase), tempo aims to help with recovery and circulation. Although it may not be accessible to all, a Moxy Monitor provides a great way to measure oxygen uptake to see that the stimulus provided gives the response we look for. If you are unfamiliar with Moxy or looking to dive into it, this is a great starting resource. Furthermore, standard heart rate monitors are a simple measure to ensure that heart rates don’t spike too high or fail to recover between repetitions and after sets.

Much like we use timing systems to monitor speed, measuring tempo runs and their intensities and goals with proper devices is helpful in understanding the systems within the body that we are working with. Anything can be great on paper, but until we see that the effect that we are aiming for is reached, we cannot prove we have accomplished our goal.

Without working this in during the off-season though, it is highly possible that tempo sessions could have negative effects on recovery come in-season phases. As the goal with tempo training is to improve circulation and recovery for pitchers between outings or position players on days where they don’t play (and therefore don’t sprint), we must ensure that these methods work as planned and use them throughout the year.

Implementation

With the season in mind, having a standardized test to train toward and focus on will help make tempo training easier to use.

*Note: Just because there is a tempo test does not inherently make this the priority over anything else. Rather, it truly is a way to standardize procedures and provide athletes with an understanding of what tempo is being used for and why.

Testing Protocol

The table below outlines two potential ways to incorporate tempo testing into baseball training:

The time-based and distance-based options provide largely the same parameters. There are some crucial differences, however, that make the time-based option the better choice, in my opinion. None are more imperative than the fact that if, and more than likely when, you have players from multiple speed groups, it will be much tougher to stay well-organized with multiple different work and rest times going simultaneously.

So, what makes this 14-second test a good, dependable baseball tempo test?

Primarily, the 70- to 90-yard range. While longer than a typical baseball sprint, it is still a sprint that can occur within a game. It is in between the range of a double and triple (60 and 90 yards, respectively). It also uses the top speed of players and helps to individualize a group task, while still making this much easier to accomplish as a big group. While differences in speed are minimal based both on the percent of top speed being used and the shorter the distance used for a test, this yardage still allows for the subtle variations to be seen.

Modifying this is as simple as changing the percentage of top speed run at, with room to adjust to 70%-75% of that. As such, work and rest times would be shortened by one and three seconds, respectively. However, shortening the distance beyond where it is would make this far less reliable of a test. While 50- and 60-yard tempos can work on a general recovery day basis, when testing they clump times up too much, and we risk messing up the validity of our tempo test.

Consequently, this test should comprehensively provide insight into athletes’ abilities to control their heart rate, breathing, and repeat work abilities. This insight is pivotal in understanding the players we work with and helping guide their development.

General Protocol

While some may think of him as a rugby guy, Keir Wenham-Flatt has a tempo template that is absolutely worth your time if it is something you do not feel comfortable fully programming. Though it may be best suited for rugby, you can tweak the template to be more useful for whatever sport you may be training or training for.

Beyond using the test and/or the template for longer-term programming, tempo training should become a staple of a program. Within baseball, tempo training is a simple and apt modality that is easily scheduled no matter the phase of the season.

Once the season begins, tempo should primarily serve as a means to provide recovery for pitchers between outings, says @sgfeld27. Share on X

Throughout the off-season, extensive tempo can be used once or twice per week in order to build tolerance for foot contact during the season and to prepare for season-long tempo tests. Once the season begins, tempo should primarily serve as a means to provide recovery for pitchers between outings. Because the goal of tempo in season will lean toward recovery modalities, keeping it on the extensive side will be the preferential way.

For position players, understanding the schedule and who is playing on a given day is of great importance—as is understanding the types of players and their potential roles on a game-by- game basis. While an earlier example showed only making it to 93% of max velocity, in a single game athletes were still recorded breaking 95% of max speed 19 times. That comes out to an average of just above twice per position player per game having a maximum or near maximum velocity sprint. Now have that occur for three straight days or six out of seven days. Or when a season has a long stretch with 14 or more straight days with a game.

Of course, the need to sprint and be prepared for sprinting is paramount. However, when games occur nearly daily for weeks in a row, how do we ensure that guys have the ability to perform well day after day? Clearly, during the season, games provide the ability to sprint—so outside of those times, it becomes that much more important to ensure we program to the demands of what is needed to make performance its best in-game. We cannot endlessly stack sprinting on sprinting on even more sprinting. Know how to use tempo training between games and on rest days for position players to help them recover and prepare for future games.

Lastly, “poles” is a word that can create intense animosity for sprinting and/or conditioning in the baseball world. Running poles is, fittingly, the most polarizing term within baseball. Sure, they may not always be used well; however, creating an absolute distaste for them is not conducive to using these markers in a productive manner. Using poles to help distinguish proper distance and timing for tempo can be highly advantageous. Proper context and programming are absolutely necessary, but psychology cannot be forgotten.

Know how to use tempo training between games and on rest days for position players to help them recover and prepare for future games, says @sgfeld27. Share on X

Systems in Concert

While team sport athletes are not sprinters, their ability to have good sprint mechanics is still important. The goal should not only be to improve overall speed, but also to remain healthier and mitigate injury risks. If availability is the best ability, then having better sprint mechanics should remain a crucial goal.

Furthermore, while the aerobic system may not be the most “sport-specific” system to develop and train, our bodies don’t work with their systems in isolation. Although the eye may move fast and blink, it still primarily has a slow twitch muscle fiber typing; likewise, although tempo may not need to be used as often as sprint training, it still is imperative to place it properly within a program. All systems work together and neglecting any part of them entirely is a disservice to our craft—at the end of the day, context and prioritization are critical to using tempo training in baseball.

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

For me, working predominantly with an injured population essentially makes conventional compound loading sparse in most cases and imprudent in others. I’ve had to work extensively on how to program effectively for my athletes without overtaxing injured areas. When you work with injured athletes, you’re forced to see things from a different angle—because there are so many hard barriers, you’re prompted to engineer unique solutions that accommodate the athlete’s limitations.

Having to do this so many times based on necessity has inspired me to develop a new paradigm for how I populate training hours, even with healthy athletes. You’re also forced into learning (and respecting) the significance of soft tissues. The ligaments, tendons, fascia, and joint capsules are unmistakably critical for overall health and function. While these tissues certainly need to be exposed to heavy static load, there is a strong argument to be made that most of the training effort should emphasize distal speed, terminal stability, and tissue quality as the athlete becomes more advanced. This has been a difficult, delicate balance I’m still figuring out.

The strength and conditioning field is an interesting space, to put it one way. In the same breath, S&C can be described as a “dog eat dog” world but also very much a copycat industry—there are a handful of predominant coaches/organizations that seem to set the path for the rest of us to follow. Along the way, some cling desperately to the industry leaders and take every word as gospel; in other cases, outcasts and radical thinkers take fundamental concepts and add their own twist or nuance to it, believing in their own mind they are revolutionaries of our field.

In fairness to both ends of the spectrum, I believe most coaches are genuinely well-intentioned, and we’re all really just trying to do one thing: figure out how to optimize human performance. But it goes without saying that for every one or two practical, beneficial, nuanced applications, there are hundreds of others that aren’t worth a damn—and remember, there is almost nothing “new” at this stage of the game. As we’d expect, this has continued to result in a great deal of debate, fervor, and borderline contempt from those across the aisles.

I was indoctrinated into this field by the likes of Louie Simmons, Eric Cressey, Mike Boyle, and others who are categorically “weight-centric” coaches. Al Vermeil, Dan Pfaff, and Buddy Morris are icons, in my view, and were instrumental in my early development as well. I can’t overstate enough that, to this day, I 100% love jacking some steel. When I put my personal bias for lifting weights aside, however, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for me to justify the practicality and effectiveness of conventional static weight for a lot of athletes and populations.

It’s becoming increasingly difficult for me to justify the practicality and effectiveness of conventional static weight for a lot of athletes and populations, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Which leads me to the premise of this article: Have we become overly reliant on using static loading with our athletes?

Origins of Strength & Conditioning

First, a quick interjection. Allow me to take you back to 1968, about three decades before I was even born. The Nebraska Cornhuskers, who had ascended to become one of the powerhouse football programs in the country, were coming off a brutal 47-0 beatdown at the hands of Oklahoma in the National Championship. In response to this, Hall of Fame Coach Tom Osborne sought out Boyd Epley to pioneer the first concerted strength and conditioning program in the country. Asserting that his team was physically manhandled and underconditioned in their game against Oklahoma, Osborne was convinced that Epley would be able to push the Cornhuskers to a new level of performance by way of strength training, organized conditioning, and stretching.

As it turned out, Osborne was right.

Fast forward nearly a decade (1978), and Epley—who is largely considered the godfather of modern S&C—became the catalyst for organizing the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA). To this day, it remains the American gold standard of our industry.

Around the same time, legendary bodybuilders like Arnold, Frank Zane, and others were radically popularizing formalized strength training. New magazines were circulating throughout the country at rapid rates; in essence, they made lifting weights cool and sexy. Then, in the 1980s, Arthur Jones introduced the world to the innovative Nautilus machine, which exploded from coast to coast, as commercial gyms were on a mercurial rise. Fast forward another decade or two, and little by little, the strength and conditioning industry became a mainstay in professional and collegiate sports, growing and evolving into what we know it as today.

And to this day, what we see in our field is still a direct extension of the work of these founding fathers.

Where Static Load Works

While I’ve become more reserved over the years as to who I feel is a good candidate for conventional static loading, please don’t misconstrue what’s in this article as me bashing weight training for athletes altogether. In fact, you’d be hard-pressed to find a better strategy for developing fundamental strength or power than with a barbell. With young athletes, the predominant necessity is simple—get stronger, add some mass, increase confidence. So, it would stand to reason that static load and conventional patterns (bench/squat/dead) should be a staple in programming.

Along similar lines—although this one is more contentious among coaches—I feel the best way to develop foundational power with young athletes is, again, with a barbell and set of plates. Teaching athletes the clean, jerk, and snatch at a young age can pay huge dividends in the long run, even if the Oly lifts aren’t a mainstay in their training development.

Teaching athletes the clean, jerk, and snatch at a young age can pay huge dividends in the long run, even if the Oly lifts aren’t a mainstay in their training development, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

The reason static load works so well here is a combination of factors:

1. Point blank—it’s effective. Outside of sprinting and heavy plyos, static loading is unequivocally the most effective way we’ve discovered to apply a significant external force in a reasonably safe manner. It’s foolish to challenge the science on this, as we’ve overwhelmingly seen that lifting weights promotes a plethora of beneficial adaptations for developing athletes.
2. The relative simplicity to coach and learn the big three and, for most, variations of the Oly lifts can be included here as well. The time it takes to teach them is time well invested. There are so many movements that stem from these, so beyond the lifts themselves, it’s critical the athlete is strong in these patterns and can perform them well.

The other situation where I believe static load is the best option is for muscle isolation, which applies largely to athletes in late-stage rehab or for athletes in need of localized hypertrophy/strength. Static loading promotes very little rep-to-rep deviation and, when coached and applied correctly, can be highly specific to localized regions. The lack of variability makes this a better option (in most cases) for localized strength/hypertrophy because the athlete doesn’t need to think about managing the path of motion. I would also add there’s generally an inherent familiarity to static loading, so the athlete can concentrate just on the work output without having to overthink it.

So, Where Is Static Load Overused?

And here’s where the feathers may start getting ruffled…

I think there are a few main applications where static load is not as effective as we like to believe and where I’ve found it to be suboptimal.

The first is with accessory lifts, in which coaches commonly include exercises like barbell or dumbbell RDLs, presses, bent rows, traditional lunges/step-ups, etc. Outside of young/developmental athletes, I think that these rudimentary movements have a very low return for athletes, mostly because the movements lack any degree of meaningful challenge or complexity and often don’t apply load significantly enough to drive a true adaptation. In a lot of cases with accessory work like this, it predisposes the athlete to just go through the motions—they’ve already done their meaningful work in the primary blocks, and now it’s time to go on autopilot and round the hour out.

Sure, I get that the adherence to training is a derivative of coaching influence, but even with strong coaching this can still occur. I believe, instead, there is a greater return on utilizing more variation and less structure with advanced and tenured athletes.

I believe there is a greater return on utilizing more variation and less structure with advanced and tenured athletes, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

The more constraints we put on them in task-based exercises, the less time they spend moving how they naturally would. Athletes continuously manipulate their bodies (to create favorable leverage) and pressure distribution across the foot (to shift momentum) when accommodating and expressing force. This is where I feel static load and task constraints shortchange us on training return.

Thus, I emphasize multiplanar, multi-tempo movements that emphasize speed, position, and proprioception. And this is all achieved using a wide array of load applications. With where I’m at now, I keep the compound static loads mostly to the primary block, then work to more fascia-driven accessories in my subsequent blocks. Here’s an example of how I would write a typical mesocycle (power phase shown).

Notice the primary block is where I retain the conventional movements, but after that, I normally want to look for other areas to emphasize and apply different load or stimulus. Then, the tertiary block progresses even more toward being fascia-driven:

When athletes are no longer in a developmental stage (16-24 years old), the goal is simply to keep them healthy so they can go out and do what they do. Another way of perceiving this is “maintaining the strengths while developing the weaknesses.” As such, we want to apply load and movement selections that challenge the nervous system and proprioception, and again refine the confidence and feel of the athlete.

We need to be mindful of the fact that our goal is to have them best prepared for movements/speeds/vectors found in sport, not become the best at lifting weights. Not to mention, for athletes who’ve put 10, 15, 20 years into training, it can sometimes be more mentally than physically taxing for them to engage in training. A large part of our responsibility is to provide an atmosphere and plan that is invigorating and enriches the process.

Where We Can Do Better

One of the overarching disconnects within our industry is recognizing the different spectrums of athlete development and the specific demands that should be applied for each. In the foundational stage (5-15 years old), athletes just need to have fun and understand the process of training. With this group, we can certainly sample some big lifts and have some semblance of structure, but I believe the most beneficial approach is organized chaos and exposing them to a bunch of movement variations that encourage the athletes to learn have fun.

One of the overarching disconnects within our industry is recognizing the different spectrums of athlete development and the specific demands that should be applied for each, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Developmental athletes (16-24 years old) should absolutely be exposed to static conventional loading. These lifts should be peaked in some form or fashion throughout the developmental years and should be a predominant training emphasis. This is the stage where we are truly trying to peak the genetic potential and get after it.

Beyond those stages (>25 years old), I believe we should look more to non-conventional loading parameters in lieu of bludgeoning basic accessory movements for the sake of more weight: non-conventional meaning more predominant band loading, cable and landmine variations, and med ball/free flow types of movements. This is a group of individuals—athletes or otherwise—that in most cases have reached their genetic peaks. Therefore, we need to remind ourselves of the question how strong is strong enough?

For advanced athletes, joint taxation and overload should be a preliminary thought when programming. Athletes who have accumulated multiple injuries/surgeries over their career and are frequently battling chronic joint pain tend to have trouble executing movements under static load and constrained paths of motion. Dynamic resistance has shown to be optimal for muscular and soft tissue loading, while minimizing axial or compressive strain on the joint. In a sense, the dynamic resistance allows the athlete to manipulate their levers, giving them greater muscular advantage throughout the ROM.

Having worked extensively with injured athletes, I’ve found non-conventional training parameters and applications have largely been more effective than traditional static loading. Coordinating with athletes on how to achieve dynamic movements (e.g., bands, med balls, landmine), to find the optimal paths and ranges of motion, can not only give them a solution for loading but also help a great deal with their confidence.

For advanced athletes, joint taxation and overload should be a preliminary thought when programming, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Dynamic loading and variable movement patterns are generally more conducive to the types and expressions of force experienced in sport. The main variables we need to consider when discussing specificity or transferability are the nervous system and proprioception. Thus, by ditching the redundantly confined accessory movements, it opens more training time to work open chain and combination patterns that emphasize these systems while allowing the athlete to move in more compatible vectors. Once strength is obtained, it really doesn’t take much to maintain it, so as long as athletes don’t get fundamentally weaker, I can’t justify spending significant amounts of training time performing basic, redundant movements at moderate load.

The Road Ahead

All in all, I think the strength and conditioning industry is at a pivotal point in its evolution. Because of the rapid development of social media platforms, the feasibility of real-time data collection, and the continuous expansion of clinical research, we are starting to have a better understanding of what works and what doesn’t. But again, we’d be remiss to suggest that we have it all figured out and that what’s been done for decades is all that needs to be performed to optimize human potential.

You don’t need to just take this from me—there are several coaches who are far better than I will ever be who have also made similar statements recently. Industry legends such as Dan Pfaff, Stu McGill, and Bill Parisi have all been tremendous influences for me to break away from the trappings of conventional static loading. Dan has spoken on numerous occasions about the importance of recognizing the influences of hydrodynamics and the fascial system on human movement/performance (see recent podcast with Eric Cressey). In Bill’s groundbreaking book Fascia Training: A Whole-System Approach, he, Tom Myers, and Stu McGill share powerful stories and evidence that the fascia system has a much bigger influence on our function and performance than has been previously understood, which ultimately points to the conclusion that we have overemphasized structural lifting and conventional static loading.

I’m not here to sell you snake oil, but I would strongly encourage you to at least investigate some of this material. Specifically, I cannot recommend Fascia Training (Parisi) or Anatomy Trains (Tom Myers) highly enough; these books changed a lot for me. Along with keeping an open mind to perceiving the human anatomy through a slightly different lens, I would also encourage you to just sample different training modalities, variations, and load applications in your training. Instead of just concentrating on progressive overload with some of your tenured athletes, see how they respond to more multiplanar, open-ended movement patterns that challenge proprioception and movement fluidity.

Besides progressive overload with some of your tenured athletes, see how they respond to more multiplanar, open-ended movement patterns that change proprioception and movement fluidity. Share on X

We need to recognize when strong enough is strong enough and start to turn our focus toward making foundational strength more applicable for sport. Be cognizant of the fact that human performance is an amalgamation of multiple systems working in concert to produce gross, global outcomes. The muscular system is just one of many that must be addressed in training.

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

Really, it’s no secret—both the simplest and the most important recovery technique are one and the same: sleeping well. Which is fascinating, considering it’s still not clear why sleep has such a beneficial effect. One critical function activated during sleep has recently been identified: the “cleaning” of the brain and the elimination of waste that accumulates throughout the day, including toxins like beta-amyloid (which is involved in Alzheimer’s disease).

All of the stimuli from the day continually trigger neurons in the brain and, like any organ in the body that converts fuel into energy, this energy produces waste proteins that build up during waking hours and must be eliminated when we sleep. Recent research has shed new light on this process and may lead to a roadmap for preventing cognitive decline and degenerative diseases. During the night, our brain goes through several phases:

• From lighter sleep to deep, restful—almost unconscious—sleep, characterized by slower brain waves; to
• The rapid eye movement phase (REM sleep) where the brain becomes more active and we are the more likely to dream.

Most researchers have focused so far on the deep, non-REM phase of sleep, during which brain activity slows down and memory retention takes place. Recently, in the journal Science, a team of Boston-based researchers used non-invasive techniques on human subjects to demonstrate that the electrical activity of brain waves plays a role in this “cleaning” process.

Brain waves are produced by electrical impulses from masses of neurons that fire together in rhythm. Their activity is faster when we are awake and slows down when we are asleep. During non-REM sleep, neurons experience a synchronized decline in activity and throughout this “quiet period,” blood flows away from the brain as decreased activity means reduced oxygen requirement. As blood flows out of the brain, cerebrospinal fluid rushes into the vacated space and flushes toxins from the brain.

Brain waves are produced by electrical impulses from masses of neurons that fire together in rhythm. Share on X

Neurons are busy when we are awake; they keep activating in unison and they need oxygen to do their job. Thus, the blood does not drain from the brain and there is no room for the cerebrospinal fluid to enter and remove the waste from all this activity. Understanding this discovery allows us to better grasp how sleep issues can impact an athlete’s performance beyond energy levels.

Clear the Beta-Amyloid!

First and foremost: the beta-amyloid is the enemy to be struck down!

If a player appears listless, responds to your encouragement with a pale imitation of Droopy, and exhibits declining cognitive performance, chances are that this protein has something to do with it. The good news is that supplementation with vitamin D3 and turmeric helps in the evacuation of this brain waste. If players appear more tired than normal, complain of an unhealthy relationship with Mr. Sandman, or are going through a period rich in decision and reflection (contract negotiation, change of club, recent paternity, etc.), it is advisable to recommend a compulsory daily intake of these two substances.

Vitamin D3 and turmeric helps in the evacuation of brain waste. Share on X

Vitamin D3 and turmeric can also be the subject of a collective supplementation strategy used to cope with a situation where the quality and quantity of sleep are undoubtedly compromised. This is the case during post-match trips that extend into the early hours of the morning, during scheduled evening competitions, or even during an intensive training camp where athletes are overworked.

Sleep Issues Are a Shared Responsibility

As a next step, the staff must take responsibility. Muscles aren’t all that benefit from night-time calm. The brain also needs its moment of peace. It is necessary for it to evacuate metabolic waste at the risk of being degraded. A player will not be able to assimilate the strategic instructions, nor reproduce the technical gestures of their position with an invariable quality, unless the daily byproducts of their cognitive activity have been naturally cleaned up by sleep.

If this “cleaning” has not been done properly due to poor or insufficient sleep, you will find them yawning during the video sessions and they will be lost in the weight training sessions. If you turn off the water in the locker room, the athlete will remain dirty and in an awkward position. Likewise, if you ask them to think and worry about this or that all the time, they won’t be able to let the blood flow out of their scalp and consent to the cerebrospinal fluid doing its job.

It’s easy to lecture athletes by pointing at a sleep hygiene infographic—oftentimes, we desperately attempt to generate positive changes in behaviors regarding sleep hygiene in our players with colorful charts and worrisome statistics. And oftentimes, we fail. Not because our athletes are bad students of sleep science, but because we do not recognize that we are a part of the problem, that the environment we created is conducive to poor sleep habits.

For instance, it is well documented that the further away from the bed a cell phone is kept at night, the more likely it is we will have a good sleep, either from taking away the urge to check Instagram notifications until late or from the potential negative effects of signaling waves. Still, many of us ask of our players to connect to fill out some kind of online wellness questionnaire immediately upon waking up, or worse to undertake a heart rate variability test before leaving bed. It is our demand that prevents them from adopting a behavior we praise.

It is our demand that prevents our athletes from adopting a behavior we praise. Share on X

Likewise, educating athletes on how to set up the perfect bedroom—ideal temperatures, dark curtains, and expensive mattresses—is in vain when competition schedules and traveling strategies mean that a high number of nights will be spent in hotel rooms or on overnight flights and long bus trips. When we address the topic of better sleep using only “education” tools and programs, we not only fail to take responsibility for some of the poor habits developed by our athletes, we struggle to give actionable recommendations.

On many occasions, I found myself addressing a player reporting poor sleep with a totally unrealistic suggestion such as “avoid stress before bed.” Nobody ever purposely inflicts themselves with a good dose of stress before bed. But for those who come home to their families, a partner sharing their concerns or a young child who needs to be taken care of both present common sources of unavoidable evening stress.

Do not forget that athletes are humans first, and when they spend eight hours a day training and thinking about their sports, when will they have time for the vast amount of other concerns that populate an adult life? Relationships, finances, family, and—in some countries—trying to understand a new tax system? For those who stay awake late at night, lack of sleep becomes an obsession, a destructive fear.

Before condemning players for their nonchalance, their unprofessionalism, or their counterproductive habits when they have not had enough sleep, coaches must question themselves. When planning a field session from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. or a team meeting at 6:30 a.m., consider if these will help the players recover better. Does bombarding the team’s WhatsApp group with schedule changes and various recommendations until late in the evening allow their brains to regenerate?

The same prescriptive effort that is provided during warm-ups or prehab exercises is required to assist the player in their quest for restful sleep. No doubt, investing in high-tech gadgets that sound “Silicon Valley” and made you feel like a real scientist in your last podcast is tempting. You may be thinking “If the player’s sleep can be recorded, then the problem can be assessed objectively.”

The same prescriptive effort that is provided during warm-ups or prehab exercises is required to assist the player in their quest for restful sleep. Share on X

Stop there!

If you are asking an athlete to wear a smart device every night, it is imperative that you know exactly how to interpret each variation and that you are prepared to draw up a plan of action for it.

An athlete with insomnia appreciates a report confirming their sleep deficit as much as an overweight player appreciates the morning weigh-in…when faced with a player who fails in their attempt to lose weight, what do you do? Do you make them download an application on their phone that weighs them in real time? Do you recommend that they “eat less” and “be more careful”? No (unless you really don’t like them).

As a conscientious professional, you are more likely to refer them to a nutritionist, a specialist who can work with them for the long term. So why should the player who cannot give in to sleep’s call be treated any differently? The gadget approach is expensive, and resources would be better spent on consultations with a sleep specialist.

Be Open to Changing Your View on Optimizing Sleep

Sometimes, a few corrections are enough; other times you have to review the copy entirely. As elite sport coaches, we must first identify the goal, the objective. The next step is to determine if the athlete, player, or squad is open to the coaching philosophy, and to define the best approach to get our messages across. Adopting a new attitude always goes through three phases:

1. It starts with an openness to change which, little by little, turns into a desire to change behaviors.
2. Then comes the need to change behaviors, radical and stubborn.
3. Finally, the new way takes hold and becomes normal over time.

So, it’s not impossible to demystify sleep—to redefine it and adopt practical and achievable measures to fully reveal this natural process of human recovery which, even today, remains under-taught and underestimated. A change in the way we approach sleep must take into account three essential facts:

1. The circadian rhythm.
2. The chronotype.
3. The fact that the traditional “eight hours of consecutive sleep” is simply unnatural.

Planning Training with Respect to Circadian Rhythms

The circadian rhythm is a 24-hour cycle which controls our biological and physiological functions. When daylight enters our eyelids in the morning—the first phase of our human day—the brain begins to produce serotonin, which reactivates mood, motivation, appetite, gut, and bladder. As the afternoon progresses, the light levels drop, and the brain begins to produce melatonin. This hormone is also produced if too little natural light enters the eye for several hours, causing a feeling of drowsiness and a lack of energy and motivation.

The circadian rhythm is a 24-hour cycle which controls our biological and physiological functions. Share on X

Therefore, to stay alert and energetic during the day—and then calm and serene at bedtime—it is essential to respect this circadian rhythm. The source of the sleep disturbance may not be within minutes of falling asleep. It may not be a question of “sleep hygiene,” or some absurd addiction to video games. It is conceivable that the source of the problem is the schedule imposed upon the player.

For many athletes, the light exposure is too low during the first two phases of the 24-hour cycle (morning and afternoon). If you have basketball players playing indoors, the challenge is obvious. But for those who work in team sports played outdoors, it is necessary to review how training sessions are scheduled.

Perhaps on a typical day, the morning is spent indoors. Monitoring routine, breakfast, video session, weight training…the work done behind the curtains. Or is it perhaps the afternoon that is devoted to these activities? In any case, does the weight room have large openings letting daylight in abundantly? If the answer is no, it is highly likely that this type of schedule, under such conditions, disturbs the circadian rhythm of a majority of players, some of whom are not recovering.

Perhaps the complaints related to sleep are characteristic of the winter periods that your team goes through. With the reduction in natural light, the spectacle of field training sessions are performed only under artificial spotlights or are planned too early or too late in the day. To avoid disturbing the circadian rhythm, it is necessary to give the player the opportunity to spend time outdoors, in natural light, frequently, from the start of the day until the end. Ensuring a healthy circadian rhythm is about adapting to the seasons.

Respecting this natural rhythm also means providing players with a stable environment. When you have several groups, you tend to switch them over during the week. One group starting earlier than the other one day and vice-versa the next day. While this practice saves you from the anger of some, especially player union representatives, and seems like the right compromise, it may not be the most optimal in the long run, as it forces the circadian rhythm of players to shift in an attempt to adapt to daily changes.

Chronotypes and Performances

The concept of chronotype sounds sophisticated, but this is actually just a term for whether you are more of a night owl or an early riser. In zoology, the word chronotype refers to the time (“chrono”) of sleep and the regular activities of an animal. It is important to note that the chronotype has an implication beyond the time of getting up and going to bed: it is the body’s natural “timeline” for the various primary activities of a normal day (such as eating and sleeping) and also determines the best times for exercise, reflection, and rest.

Chronotypes have a genetic basis and are linked specifically to a gene, PER3. Early birds have longer PER3 genes, while night owls have shorter genes. Early risers and night owls are the most notable chronotypes because they are easy to contrast. However, they are not the only ones. Some researchers consider there to be four main chronotypes.

Chronotypes have a genetic basis and are linked specifically to a gene, PER3. Share on X

The type of chronotype impacts the level of activity and vigilance during periods of wakefulness. It affects body temperature, cortisol levels, and even blood pressure. For example, “lions”—morning people—experience a peak in body temperature earlier than night owls. This may have an implication on the necessary warm-up and activation time. If the training session is in the morning, the “wolves” will need a more intense warm-up than the “lions” in order to increase their muscle temperature and achieve sufficient cognitive activation. On the other hand, if the session is scheduled for the end of the day, the roles are reversed.

For most chronotypes, cortisol levels are at their highest in the morning, usually around 9 a.m. Cortisol begins to increase gradually in the second half of the night during sleep, then its production is accelerated upon awakening, before peaking one to two hours after waking up. From then on, it gradually declines throughout the day, reaching its lowest levels around midnight. In this way, cortisol plays a vital role in sleep-wake cycles: by stimulating wakefulness in the morning and continuing to support alertness throughout the day, while gradually decreasing to allow the body to produce other molecules and hormones, in particular adenosine and melatonin, which are involved in preparation for sleep.

However, the athlete’s life is punctuated by periods of significant physical stress (training sessions, matches, etc.) and much-needed rest periods. Each intense session causes an increase in the production of cortisol, which disrupts the cycle described above.

For chronotypes such as “bears” and “lions,” an intense morning workout is perfect as their cortisol levels are already high, and a more recovery-oriented end of the day perfectly accompanies the cortisol-melatonin transition. But for “wolves” and “dolphins,” whose cortisol production is delayed, the ideal timing of training and recovery periods is different. Some players with these types of profiles may have cortisol levels at their highest during the night and lowest in the morning. A workout placed in the middle of the morning then becomes problematic, because it keeps the level of cortisol high when it is supposed to be low. If this is repeated, an imbalance in the testosterone to cortisol ratio can occur, with all the complications that entails.

Knowing a player’s chronotype is informative and can help optimize training timing. However, in the context of team sports, individualizing the session schedules according to the profile of each athlete is science fiction. To meet the strategic and technical ambitions of a team, you have to bring together all the players every day at the same time.

Fortunately, it’s a safe bet that 80% of your workforce is made up of “bears” and “lions” who easily adapt to the classic programs offered (day that starts early; workouts in the middle of the morning; mid-morning and afternoon video/meeting; and preparation/recovery in the early morning, early afternoon, and end of the day). It is the remaining 20% ​​which represents a decisive challenge.

Fortunately, it's a safe bet that 80% of your workforce is made up of “bears” and “lions” who easily adapt to the classic programs offered. Share on X

A first strategic option could be to pull this small group of “wolves” and “dolphins” towards the others—to try to rectify their cycles so that they gradually turn into “bears” and “lions.” Specific light therapy sessions or the consumption of melatonin could help change their bedtime. Bad luck, however; the chronotype is genetically determined, and even if the professional and social rhythm adopted can have an impact on the cycle preferably followed, a radical change is not “trainable,” and the various tricks put in place do not guarantee the desired effect.

Exhausting yourself trying to adapt the player to the schedule by changing their chronotype will not be the most profitable strategy. Rather, it will be about adapting parts of the schedule to the player’s chronotype. Of course, juggling training schedules and threatening the smooth running of group sessions is out of the question. But, a typical day for a professional athlete is also made up of individual, varied, and flexible activities.

Individual meetings with coaches, media obligations, and other internal requests (administrative tasks, promotions, etc.) are within the scope of individualization based on the chronotype. The obligations that a player must meet during the day can be ranked from the most important to the least important, from the most cognitively demanding to the least demanding. Once this hierarchy has been established, it is sufficient to schedule the most serious activity during the period of peak productivity dictated by the corresponding chronotype, and to fit the others into the periods of lower performance.

With a “lion,” for example, a meeting with the manager to discuss strategy will preferably be held early in the morning, while smiling at the sponsors will be a perfect activity to accompany their lunch digestion. Inviting a “dolphin” to an important meeting at 7 a.m. will not do the athlete any favors—but around 1 p.m., when many of their teammates will be gathered around a video game or will be snoring peacefully away from prying eyes on a stolen yoga mat, the “dolphin” will be happy to be there and be part of a detailed conversation.

It is also possible to group the players by chronotypes, instead of the categorization by position generally applied, in order to determine their recovery and treatment slots. On the weekly rest day, why force a “wolf” to go to the training center for a massage at 8 a.m.? As for the “lions,” don’t ask them to make themselves available for treatment at 6 p.m., they are already longing for the comfort of a TV set. During a normal training day, the complicated chronotypes—“dolphin” and “wolf”—may present an imbalance in their cortisol production and require special post-workout attention. If places are limited, they should be granted priority access to the sauna, massages, and nutritionist.

Few teams bother to test their squad and categorize their players by chronotype; in the long term, however, if we multiply by the number of training days in a season, a small improvement in individual performances of even 1% due to an alignment of the proposed schedule and the chronotypes will make a difference.

Polyphasic Sleep: A Better Approach

Eight hours of solid, continuous, uninterrupted sleep—this is the goal we set for our athletes, the gold medal of recovery that everyone strives for every nightfall. A shower of infographics on the consequences of lack of sleep on sports performance, and the heavy incentives of coaches and the media, put night’s sleep on a pedestal and make it a major issue. When the player fails to score 8 or 10 hours of eclipse, they end up finding themselves to be tired, frustrated, and anxious in the morning. But the idea that we need to sleep in one uninterrupted block is not necessarily driven by biology. There’s a forgotten fact: we haven’t always had this approach to sleep.

The idea that we need to sleep in one uninterrupted block is not necessarily driven by biology. Share on X

Western European writers of the pre-industrial times refer to the two sleep intervals as if the prospect of waking up in the middle of the night was quite familiar to their contemporaries and therefore required no elaboration. During pre-industrial times, going to bed when the sun finally goes down, waking up in the middle of the night for a few hours, and then sleeping again until dawn was normal behavior, the most common mode of sleep.

Then comes the time of the industrial revolution: as electric lighting grows, people are breaking free from the limitations imposed by natural light cycles, and with it references to a “second sleep” begin to disappear. Nonetheless, studies suggest that humans tend towards biphasic sleep if given the opportunity. In the 1990s, psychiatrist Thomas Wehr showed that when people are exposed to 14 hours of darkness, not eight, they gradually shift to a two-phase sleep pattern: two four-hour blocks with a space in between.

Moreover, we find two-step sleep habits in many cultures—perhaps you have already tried the “siesta,” a practice dear to our Spanish friends? Or, have you already had the unfortunate experience of finding yourself waiting outside the doors of a Provencal post office, which close from 12 p.m. to 4 p.m.?

Sleeping in one block is considered the healthy norm, and problems arise when it is expected to always be a perfect eight-hour period of blissful nothingness. Many believe that healthy sleep is a deep valley of unconsciousness that runs throughout the time you are in bed, but the reality is more complex. Instead, we go through periods of light and deep sleep every 90 minutes or so. Sleep is characterized by its multiple phases, which are repeated in successive cycles clearly distinct from each other and separated by periods of wakefulness. Far from an extensive and monotonous process that would justify a solely monophasic approach.

Faced with this practice of monophasic sleep, biphasic sleep is not the only alternative option. Polyphasic sleep is known to researchers as a variant based on multiple blocks of sleep, with varying and shortened durations. Sadly, the polyphasic approach to sleep is now almost taboo after enjoying a period of superficial stardom and becoming the plaything of a generation hungry for over-productivity. Blame it on Uberman’s sleep program, whose goal was to gain waking hours by sleeping a total of just three hours in six portions evenly distributed throughout the day, which was supposed to compress the physiologically less-important stages of sleep and regulate the stages vital for mental health upward in a homeostatic manner.

The idea that one can transform into a superman by depriving oneself of sleep is absurd, as it comes into dissonance with the empirical reality observed by anyone who has tried to perform during an episode of insomnia! But asking players to sleep 8-10 hours in a row is just as unnatural and restrictive as requiring them to sleep 30 minutes every 4 hours. Every athlete is different. Some people need less sleep than others. Some are free to go about their sleep-wake cycles as they see fit, while others are forced to imitate the rhythm imposed by their newborn baby. Where one may live in perfect circadian harmony with their other half, another may struggle and compromise with a family of varied chronotypes.

The reality is, you can’t always finish on time, win every duel, and be flawless in every practice. The players know that. When they suffer a setback or underperform, they are masters of bouncing back. They are endowed with the wisdom to compensate. And what keeps them going through tough times is the opportunity to do better the next session.

The reality is, you can't always finish on time, win every duel, and be flawless in every practice. Share on X

However, with a monophasic approach to sleep, the athlete in distress is deprived of a second chance. After a bad night’s sleep, the next one is already deemed critical. In season, this gaping hole cannot be filled in time to ensure peak performance in the next game, and in pre-season it makes the toil of the following days even more thankless. And after eight hours of imperative recovery stolen by a finicky nervous system, an impeccable eight-hour sleep appears as the sole way to re-establish balance.

Two sleepless nights, and suddenly the pressure surrounding the next twilight is immense. This performance urgency, night after night, creates unbearable psychological stress in those whose sleep is disturbed. This vicious cycle is not inevitable, however. Remember, the need to consolidate a single block of sleep is unfounded.

Instead of tending to a single, crucial period, a multi-phased approach allows for a salutary freedom: taking the necessary time elsewhere in the day to relieve the pressure of having to sleep at night. Because sleep works in 90-minute cycles (not 8-hour or 10-hour cycles), the expectation of a full night should be replaced by the ability to intelligently manipulate multiple 90-minute cycles. Thus, in order to ensure sufficient recovery, the stake for the player is no longer to sleep eight hours per night, but to accumulate a minimum of five cycles of 90 minutes per 24-hour period.

Obviously, the majority of these cycles will preferably occur at night, firstly because it is naturally dictated by the circadian rhythm, and secondly because the opportunities are more plentiful after the training center has closed its doors. With this method, athletes are able to plan their five sleep cycles in line with their program for the next 24 hours—and in the event that an unexpected event disrupts the progress of a cycle, it can be transferred to the next 24-hour period.

The organization of a typical week in team sports has the particularity of exposing the actors to a true roller coaster. Some days of the week start shortly after dawn and unfold like a frenzied race against time—sometimes with up to four training session, meeting, preparation, recovery, and video time slots. Other days, when time flows more slowly and the mood is peaceful, are reserved for recovery.

On match days, the pressure is tangible; it knots the stomachs, galvanizes the energies, and very often takes away any hope of a serene evening. The post-match days are very different: the physical and psychological integrity of the players must be restored. Fatigue is present in all movements, and comfort is sought from loved ones around a well-stocked plate or by means of a gentle recovery protocol.

On match days, the pressure is tangible; it knots the stomachs, galvanizes the energies, and very often takes away any hope of a serene evening. Share on X

During these weeks, days of excessive agitation and absolute or relative calm alternate, and some do not allow five cycles of sleep. Physical exhaustion costs cycles. The apprehension and excitement at the approach of an expected or feared confrontation costs cycles. Worst of all, evening games put the player’s nervous system in a state of turmoil, cause elevated cortisol levels, can introduce disturbing physical pain, and may keep the athlete’s mind busy replaying the game again and again instead of counting sheep.

Then, there are the late events to which the player is sometimes invited: dinner with the club’s partners, promotional operations, media appearances with a sponsor—these too are cycle eaters. On the other side of the equation, typical weeks have their fair share of opportunities to catch up on lost sleep. Recovery days can be filled with missing cycles, and some training days may have a late start, premature end, or periods of downtime: all opportunities to sneak in a missed sleep cycle. The calculation is simple: five cycles of 90 minutes equals 7.5 hours per 24 hours; five cycles multiplied by seven days gives a total of 35 cycles per week to reach. Shortened nights can be balanced with naps, late mornings, or early evenings.

Finally, in order to avoid over-distracting the circadian rhythm with the use of polyphasic sleep, it is important to adhere to a stable schedule for getting up and going to bed. If the whole week the player wakes up at 6 a.m. and wants to accumulate a few additional cycles on the weekend, just reprogram the alarm for another 90-minute cycle to go off at 7:30 a.m. And why not reprogram it again for an additional cycle?

In the opposite case, where the time to wake up is brought forward for an exceptional reason (travel, meetings, change of training schedule, etc.), it is recommended to wake up a complete cycle earlier. Continuing with the example above, if the player has to get to the training center 30 minutes early, then they should set their alarm for 4:30 a.m. instead of 6:00 a.m. In debt for a full cycle, they can repay it at their convenience.

It is largely up to the coaches to deliver their players a more precise and more educated message on sleep. Forcing them into a system that has no regard for their chronotype does not contribute to optimal performance. Refusing to prioritize circadian rhythms when setting a schedule does not contribute to optimal performance. And, above all, preaching for monophasic sleep in an environment like ours does not contribute to optimal performance.

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

T.A. Wehr. “In short photoperiods, Human sleep is biphasic,” Journal of Sleep Research, June 1992.

N.E. Fultz et al. “Coupled electrophysiological, hemodynamic, and cerebrospinal fluid oscillations in human sleep,” Science, 2019.

Breus. “The Power of When: Discover Your Chronotype–and the Best Time to Eat Lunch, Ask for a Raise, Have Sex, Write a Novel, Take Your Meds, and More.” 2016.

Elite-level athletes can show great feats of strength and power in extraordinary ways—and, at times, display these spectacular performances in areas they have never actually trained. This phenomena brings up an interesting concept in training, that of “expression” vs. “development.”

One specific example of this occurred in a case study¹ looking at baseball hitters’ proficiency in vision and reaction tests. In the tests, the best batters were able to also score very high on light-up board reaction tests, even though none of them had ever trained with the light-up boards before. This is a good representation of being able to express great general visual and reactive capabilities due to the many years of training to hit against challenging pitching.

But does this mean that training with the light-up board would be an effective means of training those players? Not necessarily. The best batters scored high in spite of never training with those methods before! This is where expression vs. development comes into play: tapping quickly and scoring high in a light-up board test is an expression of their ability to take in visual feedback and react by rapidly moving their hands to the right spot at the right time. They developed this capability through many years of batting practice. But enough of the baseball references…let’s dive into some training!

Expression in Training

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are an effective tool for evaluating whether training is producing the desired adaptations. For high-speed rotational athletes, KPIs often include tested performance in jumps, medicine ball throw distance and velocity, and other measures that can reflect the necessary neuromuscular qualities found in the sporting movement. For example, pressing power² is highly associated with swing power—therefore, a medicine ball chest pass for distance is an appropriate test to show that training is working!

Key performance indicators are an effective tool for evaluating whether training is producing the desired adaptations, says @billmills. Share on X

Video 1. Medicine ball throws for velocity can be used as a KPI to evaluate training.

The issue is determining how that improvement in expression occurred. Improvements in expression, or performance in an exercise, can come from:

1. Increases in overall force production from muscle groups highly involved within the movement pattern.
2. Increases in rate of force development from the neuromuscular system—increased contractile velocities or improved speed of the signal from brain to muscles.
3. Improvements in joint stabilization (tendon stiffness or muscle stiffness), which ultimately allows for a better transfer of energy throughout the kinetic sequence of the movement.
4. Improvements in muscle and tendon architecture, such as fiber-type shifts or appropriate tendon compliance, allowing for greater transfer of energy within the stretch reflex of the muscles when utilized in a high velocity fashion.
5. Improvements in technique or coordination specific to the movement being tested. This increases with measured reps as the athlete will often find the optimal pattern to achieve the highest score.

As you can see, the first four of the above areas can transfer well from one movement to another movement. There is great transfer to sport-specific power when one of those first four areas is developed in training. The last, though it can often account for great improvements in performance, does not transfer very well to other movements.

For example, let’s say an athlete performs a medicine ball rotational shotput throw³ in their training. They are performing a light load, high velocity movement that is rotational in nature, so it correlates well with throwing and swinging performance. Let’s say the first time the athlete does the exercise, they achieve a score of 30 mph. Over the next few sessions, they adjust their hand placement and elbow positioning so that they can push harder through the ball. The following week, after practicing it several times over the course of the week, they achieve a score of 34 mph. That’s a jump of four miles per hour from their initial test, but it does not mean they will now throw a baseball or swing a bat that much harder!

The adjustment in their technique is specific to the medicine ball throw.

When Is Expression Meaningful?

Many athletes will show huge improvements in the first few attempts testing with KPIs. Improvements in that short of a time period are likely all due to “beginner gains,” or improvement in coordination specific to the movement that comes about from the first one to three weeks of performing a certain exercise on a frequent basis. The mechanism behind these gains is the brain and central nervous system combining to create a more efficient signaling pattern to recruit the right muscle groups at the right time for both the stability to execute the exercise and the force to complete it.

As in the previous example, the athlete may find a better way to grip the implement or perform the technique in such a way that optimizes leverage, and therefore achieve greater performance in that way. Regardless, these early increases in performance are merely expressions that don’t reflect development or transfer to sport-specific power.

Let’s continue with the example of the athlete who saw huge “beginner gains” in the medicine ball shotput throw. In the months following, the athlete trains hard with rotational medicine ball throws, strength training, and other means of developing power. The shotput throw performance climbs steadily by one mile per hour every few weeks. This is where the expression begins to matter. These small, steady, and slow increases in performance are indications that neural and muscular qualities are the main reasons that performance is improving. This should transfer well to other rotational power movements, like swinging a bat faster or throwing a ball harder!

Video 2. MPH of medicine ball throws can be tracked to assess training progress.

Development in Training

Now that we’ve explored why expression does not always equal development, it’s important to dive into what development truly means. The reality is that development for one athlete might look entirely different for another. At the end of the day, all that matters is that training pushes adaptations for the athlete towards more power capabilities in their sport or more ability to resist injury.

The reality is that development for one athlete might look entirely different for another, says @billmills. Share on X

Let’s take the above example of a medicine ball shotput throw (after the “beginner gains” phase) and create a hypothetical scenario of training approaches for two athletes: Vinny and Frank. Both athletes will perform the med ball shotput throw in high volumes with high effort on a regular basis in their program. Let’s say no other form of upper body training was done to impact their throwing power and performance during this period.

In our hypothetical scenario, Vinny and Frank both throw 80 mph and want to throw 90 mph to improve their game and get noticed by college coaches. Both athletes want to throw harder, as harder fastballs are more difficult for opposing batters to hit, and college coaches will take notice if they show 90 mph on the radar gun. Vinny is very big and strong, but lacks rate of force development qualities—he has always struggled with throwing a baseball fast, in spite of his great strength in the bench press. Frank is skinnier and weaker—he has good velocity for someone his size, but that’s still not enough to stand out on the field and get noticed by college coaches.

Since Vinny lacks power at high velocities, the shotput throw fits his needs well. He’s able to see two to three mph jumps in performance every month of the offseason. By the end, he’s able to shotput throw a four-pound ball at 39 mph from a pitching start position. He concurrently trained hard with baseball throw velocity as well, long-tossing and throwing at high effort for the radar gun. This all increased his velocity to the point of breaking the 90 mph mark after just four months of training.

Frank, on the other hand was not able to improve his shotput throw very much. He did not gain any weight or strength in his upper body, and the medicine ball throws were not able to develop his biggest needs. His baseball throw velocity was only able to improve by a marginal amount.

This is a very rudimentary example and does not take into consideration other important areas for throwing velocity such as mobility, movement pattern, ball grip, and throwing deceleration capabilities. The goal of this example is to demonstrate how a force-velocity profile may differ greatly between two athletes, although their external output (80 mph throw) is the same. As such, not all athletes should follow the same routine.

A force-velocity profile may differ greatly between two athletes, although their external output is the same, says @billmills. Share on X

Video 3. Using a supine overhead throw with 10lb, 6lb, and 2lb medicine balls to create a force-velocity profile.

This is based on an actual story of an athlete I trained who came into the offseason topping at 83 mph off the mound and finished the offseason at 91 mph. He entered the offseason with a 285 lb bench press and 565 lb deadlift, yet could not throw the 4 lb ball harder than 32 mph in the shotput throw. We did not train any reps with the traditional bench press, but we focused on many forms of ballistic pressing. He had all the force in the tank, but he needed to develop his rate of force development. The medicine ball throws helped to develop and express! That, coupled with a strict, high-effort throwing regimen, helped him increase velocity by so much in such a short time.

Frank, on the other hand, is a fictional individual but represents a likely scenario for a lot of younger baseball players. They will find cool-looking, explosive exercises on social media and copy that into their training. All the while, they neglect strength training, proper diet, and sleep patterns…and that leads to them making little progress!

Are Medicine Ball Throws Expression or Development?

To best answer this question, you first have to look at the athlete’s biggest needs. If they are velocity-deficient—meaning they are strong but lack the ability to produce force at very high speeds—then medicine ball throws will be a perfect fit. However, athletes who are force-deficient, as many beginners are, will not see great development with medicine ball throws. They may be able to express great performance with medicine balls, but they won’t be able to see large improvements as a result of doing them. Those force-deficient athletes will need to train against heavier loads and with greater mechanical tension to improve muscle mass and overall force production. That’s how they will develop power!

Athletes who are force-deficient, as many beginners are, will not see great development with medicine ball throws, says @billmills. Share on X

Video 4. Supine overhead medicine ball throw.

What About One-Rep Max Testing?

This is another common area of argument on social media. Unless you’re competing for a powerlifting or Olympic lifting competition, you don’t truly ever have to test a one-rep max. Increases in strength gains are great but testing those with a big one-rep max day can be taxing and detrimental to the program as a whole.

Let’s take the example of an athlete who wants to improve their squat from 315 to 405 lbs, ultimately helping them run faster and jump higher. If they constantly test their one-rep max every week, they will gas themselves out to the point that it could take three to four days of recovery before they can do any meaningful form of lower body training again at high intensity. This comes back to expression versus development; plus the fact that most novice lifters will throw technique out the window if all they ever do is try to test their one-rep max. So now they’re decreasing the number of meaningful training days they can complete and limiting the number of high quality reps in their program. That’s a recipe for zero jump and sprint gains at the end of the offseason.

Most novice lifters will throw technique out the window if all they ever do is try to test their one-rep max, says @billmills. Share on X

Rather, I would suggest high-effort reps, even if they are heavy sets of one to three reps. Always try to move the bar as fast as possible. Never miss a rep and add weight week in and week out. If you have a bar speed sensor, you can test the expression of each rep and ultimately ensure high quality. That’s a recipe for success!

What Are Some Common Forms of Expression?

These are commonly found in the sports performance realm. I’ll break them down between ways they can be a “smart” or a “not so smart” decision depending on how they’re used. It should be noted that these are generalizations. Everyone will have their own unique way of using the following scenarios. Just make sure of the best fit for your program.

One-Rep Max Testing: Most commonly used in compound lifts such as the squat, bench press, deadlift, and other barbell-based lifting movements (Olympic lifts, etc.).

Smart:

• Tested at the middle and end of the offseason.
• Tested after months of consistent training, ensuring perfect form and likely a large increase in performance from when they started.
• Great way to build camaraderie and “buy-in” to training.

Not so smart:

• Tested too frequently, not allowing for enough time spent training to actually increase strength.
• Allowing for sub-par form with the movement.
• Testing in an unsafe setting without spotters, catch-pins, etc.

Key Performance Indicator Testing: These are tests that reflect the power needs found in the sport. For example, a baseball outfielder must be able to accelerate quickly in a sprint and develop rotational power at very high speeds. Some good key performance indicators for this outfielder could be a rotational medicine ball throw for velocity (measuring rotational power), a 30 yd dash (measuring sprint acceleration), and a medicine ball chest pass for distance (measuring upper body pressing power at high speeds). Those measures should go up as a result of all the training done in the program.

Smart:

• Tested once every few weeks to ensure the program is pushing the athletes in the right direction.
• Tested in a competition setting, ensuring that athletes push each other.
• Put these numbers on a leaderboard! Exercises like jumps, sprints, and medicine ball throw velocities belong on the board up there with weightlifting one-rep maxes—it shows what tests correlate best with the sport!

Not so smart:

• Only using the KPI tests in your training, neglecting other important areas.
• Equating a KPI with on-field performance. (Example: “I throw this medicine ball 40 mph, that means I throw a baseball 90 mph, so I don’t have to train throwing a baseball”…it doesn’t work like that!)
• Testing in ill-timed or fatigued conditions. If an athlete just played four games in four days, they probably aren’t ready to test!

Video 5. Once coaches identify their training KPIs, they should track and test every few weeks to make sure their athletes are progressing in the right direction.

What Are Some Common Forms of Development?

These are some ways that you can really focus on development in training. It really comes down to knowing the athlete’s needs best. So in this segment, I’m going to break it down to “If they need more strength” or “If they need more velocity.” Those categories are a simple way to break it down, but understand that a healthy mix of all training types (high speed, heavy load, etc.) should all fit in a program to see the best gains possible.

A healthy mix of all training types (high speed, heavy load, etc.) should all fit in a program to see the best gains possible, says @billmills. Share on X

High Quality Weight Room Reps: Showing up to your workout is half the battle. High quality reps are where the battle is won!

If you need more strength:

• Focus on perfect technique on each rep. Why? When we change technique in an exercise, we change the level of recruitment for the intended muscles. For example, with a dumbbell row,⁴ you want to focus on the muscle groups in the rear shoulder and upper back driving the movement. Too many kids will start the row by extending the hips and yanking the chest upwards, taking away from the effectiveness of the exercise!
• Add weight or reps each week. Progressive overload is crucial to increasing muscle size and maximal force production.
• Heavy sets of five reps work great for a majority of compound lifts. I typically don’t recommend sets with much higher reps than that, as fatigue during the set can take away from the quality of rep.

If you need more speed:

• Use a bar speed sensor if possible. Know what ranges you should be working in to achieve your goals. This also ensures that intent is as high as it can be on every rep.
• Keep bar speeds⁵ from falling too much. For example, if you’re working with a heavy set of three reps and your bar speed is 0.5 m/s, your bar speed should never fall below 0.4 m/s. If you do dip below that, you’re likely running more towards fatigue and further away from power development.

Sprinting, Plyometrics, and Other High-Speed Forms of Training: As I’ve talked about previously, there are some athletes who may have a greater need for these forms of training than others. Regardless, all athletes will likely see some positives come about from these styles of training—just make sure it fits well with the entirety of the program.

If you need more strength:

• Program a few sets of these after a warm up and prior to weightlifting. This can create a great potentiating⁶ effect, helping athletes move some serious weight afterwards. For example, three sets of four to five max-effort jumps can get athletes ready to squat and deadlift a house!
• Do not mix conditioning with speed development! The goal here is not to gas athletes out, as that could run them into fatigue—so much that it will take away from their ability to make progress in the weight room.
• Don’t be afraid to add a little bit of resistance to their high-speed work. I have found that resisted sprints, heavier med ball slams, and chest passes work best with force-deficient athletes. Why? They need to be able to apply more force to their movements. More load should create adaptations leading to more force.

If you need more velocity:

• Measure performance on every rep. Time your sprints, measure jump height, etc. Why? This is the best way to ensure low fatigue and increased performance over time.
• Tailor your speed work to your biggest needs. For example, if you know you have great top speed, but relatively poor acceleration capabilities, you may want to increase volume of shorter sprints and improve performance in those.
• Lighten the load if needed. Assisted jumps, lightweight medicine ball throws, etc. can increase the speed of the movement. This is ultimately the missing factor—applying more velocity to their movements.

Tying It All Together

Always focus on development first. Use key performance indicators as a compass for where your training needs to push, but it is not a map—those KPIs can be a huge help and a great way to build camaraderie. Ultimately, you must always push for high quality reps in every movement. That’s what makes the difference at the end of the program!

Always focus on development first, says @billmills. Share on X

If you haven’t guessed yet, my personal area of expertise is in rotational power sports such as baseball and javelin. Medicine ball throws, jumps, and sprints are all great KPIs for baseball players, golfers, and javelin throwers. I recommend testing every two to three weeks to see that they are improving as a result of training. Those movements can produce greater adaptations with those who are already quite strong and profile as velocity-deficient. Therefore, they really should only be included frequently with those types of athletes. Athletes who are beginners or are more force-deficient should train against heavier resistances. They should aim to increase maximal force production and that will ultimately improve their performance with higher velocities!

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 & Supplemental Media

1. Laby, D.M., Kirschen, D.G., Govindarajulu, U., and DeLand, P. “The Hand-eye Coordination of Professional Baseball Players: The Relationship to Batting.” Optometry and Vision Science, 2018.

2. Miyaguchi, K. and Demura, S. “Relationship between upper-body strength and bat swing speed in high-school baseball players.” J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jul;26(7):1786-91. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318236d126. PMID: 21921820.

3. Bill Miller, Instagram, 7/14/2020.

4. Bill Miller, Instagram, 6/23/2021.

5. Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Yáñez-García, J.M., Mora-Custodio, R., Pareja-Blanco, F., Ravelo-García, A.G., Ribas-Serna J., and González-Badillo, J.J. “Velocity-based resistance training: impact of velocity loss in the set on neuromuscular performance and hormonal response.” Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2020 Aug;45(8):817-828. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2019-0829. Epub 2020 Feb 4. PMID: 32017598.

6. Bill Miller, Instagram, 10/7/2020.

Edward Lorenz was a famous American mathematician and meteorologist, and one of Lorenz’s research interests was attempting to predict both the weather and the longer-term climate. One day in 1961, Lorenz was in his lab carrying out calculations and working on a computer model aimed at predicting a weather system. This was tedious work, requiring him to input numbers from a printout for each of the 12 variables that the model contained. Lorenz had run these particular numbers before and was redoing the prediction model as a way to check it.

On the second run-through, Lorenz entered one value ever-so-slightly differently. In the original simulation, the number he used was 0.506127. In his new simulation, Lorenz rounded the number—almost imperceptibly—to 0.506. Lorenz then went down the hall to get a coffee, and when he returned, he was astounded by what he saw: the small rounding he had made had a dramatic effect on the weather scenario that played out in the prediction. The results of the second simulation—simulating two months’ worth of weather—were nothing like the first.

Lorenz was puzzled by this, assuming that there was an issue with the computer system. He checked the equipment but couldn’t spot anything obvious. Rechecking the data, Lorenz noticed that, early on in the simulation, the values from both simulations were the same. However, after about a week of the simulation, they started to differ—at first by just one unit after the decimal place, then two. The size of the disparity typically doubled every four days or so, creating a large difference in simulation outcome after two weeks.

This was a stark reminder to Lorenz that miniscule changes within a complex system (like the weather) could have large downstream effects. In later speeches—and in popular media—this would be dubbed “the butterfly effect,” whereby one flap of a butterfly’s wings could create a tiny change in the atmosphere that may be enough to alter the course of the weather forever. This concept led to the development of chaos theory, the study of complex systems that suggests that, despite appearing random, there are underlying patterns and interconnectedness between aspects within such systems.

From Typhoons to Torn ACLs

We see these theories applied in practice during hurricane season—predicting the path of a hurricane is important, as it allows governments to prepare residents within the path to evacuate if needed. This prediction is, of course, difficult. In large part this is because of chaos theory—the factors that influence the path of a hurricane include wind speed and direction, sea temperature, and humidity, and small changes in any one of these can have a large influence on the path of the hurricane.

As a result, predicting the path of a hurricane requires accurate projections for each of these variables, along with an understanding of how they interact. Scientists are getting pretty good at this:

• In 1954, agencies could only provide predictions up to one day in advance.
• By 1964, this had grown to three days.
• By 2001, hurricane tracks were predicted up to five days into the future.

In 2020, Hurricane Laura was first identified as a large mass of clouds off the west coast of Africa. Five days later, it was given its name, and three days after that, meteorologists predicted that it would hit land on August 27, at 2 a.m., in Cameron, Louisiana. On August 27, at 1 a.m. and less than a kilometer away from Cameron, Hurricane Laura did indeed make landfall.

Given the complexity involved in predicting the path of a hurricane, the accuracy of this prediction is quite remarkable. This is something scientists have been working on for decades—making small, incremental improvements that add up to major leaps forward. The question is: How have they done this?

This is something scientists have been working on for decades—making small, incremental improvements that add up to major leaps forward. The question is: How have they done this? Share on X

Back in the 1970s, scientists relied on patterns seen in past hurricanes, essentially using prior performance as a predictor of future hurricane path. This was fairly useful—in the 1970s, meteorologists could typically predict the site of landfall for a hurricane to within around 500 miles—but not quite precise enough. Five hundred miles is quite a large margin for error, leading to a lot of people perhaps being unnecessarily warned.

Over time, meteorologists have begun to utilize more complex models that are dynamic in nature; the models change based on the data they receive. And they receive a lot of data, with more than 40 million different observations plugged into the models daily. This data is then used to create 50 different forecasts, in which the data is ever so slightly modified, allowing the scientists to understand the confidence of their predictions.

In late 2019, researchers from the U.S.—led by lead author Ben Stern—used this hurricane example to put some of the practices seen in sports performance under the microscope, as sports injuries are also complex and dynamic in nature. In a 2016 paper, published in the prestigious British Journal of Sports Medicine, the authors argued that simplifying complex problems into basic units is highly reductionist. This approach is useful for linear relationships (for example, exploring the relationship between smoking and lung cancer, where the more cigarettes you smoke, and for longer, the greater your risk); it less useful, however, for non-linear relationships, or relationships that are highly complex and multifactorial in nature.

Looking at ACL injuries, for example, we can see that the importance of a given risk factor differs between sports: in ballet dancers, fatigue is a key risk factor, while in basketball players, it is hip muscle weakness. But we can also expect to see variation between people in the same sport—Ballet Dancer A’s risk factors may be different than those of Ballet Dancer B. And yet, Stern and his coauthors wrote that we tend to completely ignore this in sport, instead focusing on, say, one “injury prediction test” and using this to inform future risk and interventions.

Meteorologists use 40 million data points daily to predict the path of a hurricane, while we might use one data point in a yearly injury screen to inform our practice over a 12-month period.

Meteorologists use 40 million data points daily to predict the path of a hurricane, while we might use one data point in a yearly injury screen to inform our practice over a 12-month period. Share on X

The Butterfly Effect and Injury Models

Stern and his colleagues instead suggest that we view the athlete in front of us as a highly complex human that is able to exhibit one of two separate states: a healthy state and an injured state. The athlete will constantly move toward one of these two end states—sometimes getting very close to the end destination (i.e., being injured)—but mostly being pushed or pulled in each direction.

The factors that push or pull an athlete in a given direction are broad and varied, and we should cast the net widely here: aspects such as stress, previous history, and non-sport workload all contribute to increasing or decreasing the risk of injury. Each of these factors can be subject to two competing factors:

1. Stress (which is destabilizing).
2. Accommodation (which is stabilizing).

The athlete is constantly balancing both stressful and accommodating factors; how well they are able to do this determines how likely they are to become injured. As this balance is highly dynamic and ever-changing, it’s easy to see how basing injury risk off just one test at one point in time is likely to prove highly ineffective.

A potential solution to make us better able to make an informed decision around injury risk for a given athlete on a given day is to collect data more frequently. This is what the meteorologists did when improving their hurricane path predictions. While we obviously can’t expect to collect 40 million data points per day, we should probably do better than one data point per year.

A potential solution to make us better able to make an informed decision around injury risk for a given athlete on a given day is to collect data more frequently, says @craig100m. Share on X

In team sports, this is perhaps a bit more common. GPS systems and heart rate monitors are in wide use, allowing performance staff to have more data at their fingertips to inform decisions.

This data collection doesn’t have to be costly or high tech: a now-seminal 2015 paper demonstrated how subjective, self-reported measures (for example, rating of perceived exertion, or mood) were highly sensitive to changes in training load, more so than objective measures such as blood sampling or heart rate. Even just a conversation with athletes as to how they’re feeling—and observing how they move during warm-ups—can provide a useful data point for understanding how the athlete is presenting on that day.

Data from a diverse range of potential injury determinants allows us to better understand the true injury risk of our athletes, so collecting information broadly is also important. In their paper, Stern and his colleagues recommend regular collection of self-report measures exploring aspects such as:

• Life stress, anxiety, and coping skills.
• An assessment of sleep quality and quantity.
• A nutrition log.
• Sport-specific performance tests (which can likely be embedded into a pre-session warm-up).

In a second paper, Stern and his colleagues introduce a second important concept related to complexity and performance: that of state dependence. In a system—such as the human body—where state dependence exists, the interaction between variables is not static. For example, if variable 1 increases variable 2 by 50% on one occasion, a change in a different variable, variable 3, over time may mean that, in the future, variable 1 only increases variable 2 by 10%. The size of this change can be large. Sometimes, improvements in the same variables may be:

• Positively correlated (i.e., improvements in one lead to an improvement in the other).
• Negatively correlated (i.e., improvements in one lead to a worsening in the other).
• Non-correlated (i.e., there is no relationship).

Whether these variables are correlated or not depends on the overall state of the system; the relationship between them depends on other variables.

Making the Connection with Your Athletes

When it comes to considering injury risk, we typically see that increases in psychosocial stress are associated with increased injury risk. But what happens if the athlete has well-established and effective coping mechanisms? A change in this variable changes the relationship between stress and injury.

This change is most likely stable, but there are much more transient changes in a variable that could modify this relationship; a few nights of poor sleep, for example, will likely increase the sensitivity of the athlete to stress, further increasing the risk of injury. This is a further reminder that a single piece of data that is collected can only serve as a snapshot of where the athlete is in time. What we need to know, given the complexity of humans, is how the data changes over time—having this knowledge will enable us to better understand what is truly happening in the athletes we work with.

A single piece of data that is collected can only serve as a snapshot of where the athlete is IN TIME. What we need to know, given the complexity of humans, is how the data changes OVER TIME. Share on X

Based on the work of Stern and his colleagues—as well as the underlying principles of chaos theory—we can develop some rules of thumb when it comes to working with athletes.

1. We need to consider athletes as complex beings; just because we’ve seen a relationship between two variables before doesn’t mean we will see that relationship again. Furthermore, we need to remember that a multitude of different factors likely influence any apparent relationships.
2. We need to move away from static, one-shot measurements (for example, pre-season screenings) if we want to better understand complex aspects such as injury risk and performance improvements. This isn’t to say that pre-season screenings aren’t useful—they can identify key issues to work with—but having more frequent data collection allows for more regular updates around how our athletes are tracking.
3. As a wide variety of factors influence how an athlete responds to training, or how likely they are to become injured, collecting a diverse range of data sources likely improves our ability to “predict”—or, at least, make informed decisions—around how athletes are responding.

As such, it’s better to collect information from a diverse range of sources (e.g., sleep, stress, perceived recovery, movement velocity) than from very similar sources. Humans are complex biological beings; we can do better than just reducing them to a single number.

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

In July 2019, Baxter Holmes wrote “These kids are ticking time bombs—the threat of youth basketball” for ESPN.com, an in-depth article on the dangers of high volumes and over-specialization too early in an athlete’s maturation. Despite being written about basketball, the epidemic Holmes identifies is a general narrative amongst all youth sports, with soccer, softball, baseball, and volleyball all demonstrating similar paths to early specificity.

As the strength and conditioning coach for the Pittsburgh Riverhounds Development Academy, I have also witnessed the growing trend among our young athletes to identify strictly with one sport at increasingly younger ages. This same perpetual cycle appears to be the norm regardless of sport: extra, position-specific skill lessons scattered around team trainings throughout the week, culminating in weekend competitions. Well-intentioned, but slightly misguided, these youth sports operate under the misconception that more is always better.

As a result, young athletes (and their parents) have entered an open arms race to acquire as much technical skill work and attend as many “elite” showcases as possible. There is, however, an important distinction between development and demonstration. Continually prioritizing games, tournaments, and showcases at the expense of holistic development too early in an athlete’s growth will likely be unsustainable—not just as a detriment from a health and wellness perspective, but also a potential limiting factor as it relates to higher levels of skill acquisition. A lack of exposure to diverse motor patterns early can stunt growth late. As complexity continues to grow for increased sporting mastery, a lack of foundational motor function can inhibit further technical progress.

What athletes once organically acquired by playing different sports over different seasons now has to be achieved through well-thought-out, systematic performance training, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

What athletes once organically acquired by playing different sports over different seasons now has to be achieved through well-thought-out, systematic performance training. As a result, I have comprised a hit list of both general and special preparedness exercises that not only build resilience, but also provide an enriched motor environment to sustain healthy, long-term growth in the one-sport youth specialist.

Specificity of Preparedness

Preparation training should be effective, efficient, and nondisruptive to the two tasks being prepared for: training both to enhance performance in the specific sport and to fill motor gaps left by early specificity. Throughout the pursuit of fulfilling these two goals, performance coaches need to remain mindful of the fact that we are not trying to replace one sport for another, nor are any trophies won for excessively fatiguing athletes or inducing unnecessary soreness. There is tremendous value in being succinct, and like most things in life, the simplest answer is often the best.

The off-field physical preparation process should start by developing broad athletic principles and gradually narrow as progress is made toward more desirable traits. The difference between general preparedness (GPP) and more specific preparation (SPP) can be subtle. From a broader perspective, general preparedness exercises teach global concepts under minimal stress.

Maintaining a comparatively low magnitude and preparing for what is to come is of greatest consequence. Special preparatory exercises come closer to the velocities and stresses experienced during play, and the direction of the application of force also takes on greater significance. Some examples include:

• General prep: Basic strength work and in-place jumps.
• Special prep: More elastic and develops sustained, rhythmic horizontal displacement in all planes of motion.
• SPP: Skipping, bounding, lateral shuffling, and sprinting.

Good physical preparation should also include an appropriate blend of tension and torque-oriented exercises with special consideration given to the force-velocity relationship reflected by the sport itself. Increased time under tension is most associated with developing strength, and building strength is necessary regardless of the sport to enhance an athlete’s ability to produce force and increase their resilience to injury.

Video 1. Split jumps exemplify the subtle differences in GPP and SPP exercises, as these in-place jumps include a sustained, rhythmic element.

Rate-of-force themed exercises train an athlete to quickly demonstrate their strength. For nearly all ball-court athletes, most of their preparedness should reflect this. To play explosive and fast on the competitive field, you must facilitate those same attributes in the training hall by moving as dynamically as possible with zero external resistance and lifting light-to-moderate loads as explosively as possible (Verkhoshansky & Siff, 264.) Repetitive efforts and maximum efforts also must be done, but not as frequently. This general ethos is the foundation on which the Houndsspeed philosophy is built.

Radcliffe-Inspired Unilateral Jump Progression

High-Powered Plyometrics by Jim Radcliffe and Robert Farantinos was first recommended to me by Carl Valle, and it did not disappoint. Like the more widely known Supertraining by Verkhoshansky and Siff, High Powered Plyometrics delivers a highly scientific approach to speed and power development but in a much simpler, reader-friendly way. Loaded with logical and highly effective progressions specific to nearly every sport, this book is on a short list of must reads.

In particular, the single leg jump progression presented by Radcliffe and Farantinos satisfied both my desire for simplicity and the need to develop multiple traits concurrently, such as:

• Power.
• Speed.
• Proprioception.
• The ability to rapidly decelerate.

Video 2. Single-leg tuck jumps are part of a unilateral plyometric progression inspired by Coach Jim Radcliffe.

The best exercises are able to build the greatest number of attributes by the simplest means, especially when physically preparing an athlete who is already dedicating significant time and energy to the technical and tactical aspects of their sport. The one-leg jump progression certainly checks many boxes. Beginning with in-place single response efforts in which the landing is valued just as much as the takeoff, this is progressed by imposing greater speed and motor complexity before building out to more elastic single leg leaps in which the center of mass is displaced.

The best exercises are able to build the greatest number of attributes by the simplest means…and the one-leg jump progression certainly checks many boxes, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

I appreciate this progression because of the smooth intensification from general characteristics to more specific desirables with a steady rise in both stress and skill, while simultaneously promoting strong pelvic position. Strong pelvic control is essential and an underlying theme that is a requisite for efficient movement. The single-leg jump progression is also fantastic at recruiting the opposite glute and hip simultaneously, which has strong carryover to good sprint mechanics. The progression is simple, but not to be confused with easy. It looks something like this:

1. Single-leg pogos
2. Split jumps
3. Scissor jumps
4. Double scissor jumps
5. Single-leg tuck jump (in place)
6. Single-leg leap (distance)
7. Lateral single leg hop

As with any power- or speed-dominant exercise, low volume and high intensity is best. Approximately 4-8 total jumps per set and 2-3 total sets per exercise is optimal.

Videos 3 and 4. Progressing from the scissor jump to the double scissor jump.

Horizontal Skips, Jumps, Bounds

While the vertical jump might receive the most attention when it comes to assessing power, it only tells a comparatively small part of the story as it relates to soccer athletes specifically. Being able to rapidly generate force to overcome both inertia and gravity will always have value, but the vertical jump is a singular moment that illustrates brutish strength more than fluid, rhythmic athleticism.

For this reason, I value continuous horizontal jumps and bounds as better indicators of athleticism more than one singular vertical jump, because these movements demonstrate how well an athlete can create and sustain horizontal momentum. Even for more vertical-oriented sports like volleyball and basketball, horizontal jumps, skips, and bounds still have great value for motor development.

Even for more vertical-oriented sports like volleyball and basketball, horizontal jumps, skips, and bounds still have great value for motor development, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

Although debatable, speed is perhaps the most coveted physical attribute among all ball-court sports, so preparatory exercises that develop and ultimately demonstrate horizontal displacement are better barometers of athletic success. Specifically, the triple broad jump and six-step alternating bound have much greater carryover to short accelerations, and academy athletes use objective measures like those the Probotics Just Jump Mat, Freelap Timing System, and a simple tape measure provide as evidence to support a heightened sense of value to horizontal efforts.

Through the years, I have found one of the most effective and time-efficient ways to develop horizontal displacement is to take the more extensive, less stressful skill development exercises such as marching, skipping, prancing, and galloping and impose specific ground contact limitations while simultaneously asking the athletes to just simply cover more ground. Imposing limitations on ground contacts serves two purposes:

1. Drives intent and forces the athlete to consider every ground contact.
2. Allows the coach to monitor volume.

This requires no quantitative measurements (although the movements can be measured), and embedding these within warm-ups for nearly every session adds up fast and exposes the young athlete to the feeling of “getting out” with a variety of cadences and movement strategies, providing the necessary diversity to be drawn upon later.

Stairs, hills, and resisted variations of the same exercises are also fantastic at teaching horizontal displacement—these mitigate the stress on the athlete as well by limiting the velocities achieved (and resultant forces). To that end, these variations are great precursors to flat surfaces, not the other way around. This is precisely why physics matter and why it is important to not confuse perceived exertion with actual effect.

Lateral Bounds

Complete preparation for all athletes should also include a sound approach to incorporating multiplanar movements. This is more necessary now than in previous generations because of the lack of movement diversity as result of the increased early specificity. Intricacies in carryover from sport to sport—like footwork in soccer translating to a more efficient lateral shuffle while playing defense in basketball or a wide receiver’s ability to better “high-point” a football because of rebounding in basketball—are now missing. Besides larger concerns—such as appropriate energy system development—coaches must also focus on smaller, more specific details such as direction of force and the planes of motion that reflect the needs of the sport being prepared for.

Lateral movements are potent developers of the glutes, hips, and adductors, so they are of great value to all athletes, but even more so for the multidirectional athlete. This is where I feel more traditional standards in strength and conditioning can lead a coach or athlete astray by perhaps overvaluing linear (sagittal) and vertical forces at the expense of lateral (frontal), rotational (transverse), and horizontal forces. For me, management and the slow intensification of stresses in the frontal plane begin with general strengthening exercises like lateral squat and lunge variations and is slow cooked to lateral marches, skips, hops, jumps, and ultimately bounds.

Admittedly, in the not-too-distant past, I feel I likely spent too much time developing the lower-stress lateral squat and lunge variations when my athletes would have been better served skipping, hopping, and jumping laterally. Lateral movements in conjunction with unilateral strength and rate of force development are the foundation for how I now prepare our athletes for multiplanar agility.

Lateral movements in conjunction with unilateral strength and rate of force development are the foundation for how I now prepare our athletes for multiplanar agility, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

With nearly unlimited degrees of freedom within the game itself, I am not the biggest fan of choreographed change of direction exercises. These exercises are great to develop broader concepts in the youngest athletes, but beyond the earliest stages of development, drills with predetermined paths lack realism. As result, I prefer to prepare our athletes for the forces and stresses they will encounter within the game and let their technical training and intuition develop the specificity necessary.

Video 5. Like the linear skips, jumps, and bounds mentioned earlier, lateral bounds teach an athlete to displace their center of mass, but in an entirely different plane of motion.

With that said, lateral bounding and its variations win the day as they relate to imposing stress in the frontal plane. Developing lateral bounds begins with single response efforts in which landing with a soft knee is emphasized and then progressed to fluid back and forth lateral displacements where force needs to be absorbed and quickly recreated in the opposite direction.

This exercise is harder to quantify because of the rhythmic back and forth nature, so simple qualitative assessments do just as well. Flat discs, tape, and lines on a field can provide good visuals for the athlete and coach alike as to how much separation they are creating with each bound.

As with all my plyometrics—regardless of intensity—I encourage our athletes to rely on feeling the ground as opposed to having to see the ground. Over time, this builds a tremendous sense of kinesthetic awareness. I feel very strongly this not only enhances performance but is also important in preventing injury. As an athlete becomes stronger, lateral bounding can be progressed to Polish boxes and asymmetrical surfaces to create subtle variances in both movement pattern and force.

Med Ball Mayhem

Bending, twisting, whipping, throwing, and catching are all base level motor skills every athlete should possess, regardless of sport. Medicine balls are a great tool for both developing and demonstrating mastery of all these athletic attributes; they can also be used extensively to develop low-stress strength and rate of force while having the potential to be “dialed up” to intense ballistic efforts.

Progress in these traits can be easily objectified with increasing med ball loads and distances on a measuring tape. Even though our field-playing soccer athletes (non-goalies) do not have to throw and catch, these two specific skills are great at developing upper body coordination. Over my tenure with the Riverhounds, it has become painfully apparent that as gifted as some of our young soccer players are with a ball at their feet, they are equally as deficient if instructed to catch that same ball with their hands.

Admittedly, this initially flew under my radar, as I was quick to dismiss it as unimportant. Time and experience have proven otherwise, and I share this in the hope that I can help others avoid the same mistake I made. Lack of upper body motor control is a large void that will negatively impact:

• Speed.
• Efficiency at submaximal speeds.
• The acquisition of more advanced technical capabilities.

Quite simply, max speed, the resultant speed reserve, and advanced technical prowess are full body efforts—therefore, a lack of upper body strength and coordination will eventually become a limiting factor. To combat this, simple partner drills that initially only require handoff exchanges such as med ball over/unders, half twists, and full twists eventually can be progressed to light tosses accentuating the same motor skills. I do not want my athletes catching max effort intensive throws, so I reserve those for expressions of starting strength and rate of force only.

Max speed, the resultant speed reserve, and advanced technical prowess are full body efforts—therefore, a lack of upper body strength and coordination will eventually become a limiting factor. Share on X

I do, however, like to measure distances and loads on all intensive throws because I am a firm believer in that which gets measured gets improved. Throws of all varieties—like underhand forward, underhand backward, chest, rotational, and overhead—are great ways to monitor power development in an environment that more closely resembles a field-based athlete’s natural habitat. It is also important to consider utilizing throwing and catching as a tool to develop skill in tracking flighted balls. This is essential for field players timing headers, goalies managing crosses, and the entire synchronization of set pieces.

Again, I missed on this in my younger coaching days—what I mistakenly thought was innate was likely something that must be developed. Growing up playing basketball and baseball, reading and quickly assessing the trajectory of a ball off a rim or a bat was an acquired skill that undoubtedly assisted in my timing of headers. For those who specialize too soon, this becomes a glaring weakness in their aerial game. Fortunately, it is an easy skill to develop with a limited investment of time, energy, and equipment.

Five minutes a few times a week with a partner and some sort of ball (tennis, whiffle, lacrosse, football) is all that is needed. Over-the-shoulder catches like a centerfielder running down a ball hit into the gap should be the end goal, and injecting randomness to the throws is encouraged to allow an athlete to experience varied trajectories and cover different distances.

Relative Strength “Big Three”: Pull-Ups, Dips, and Single-Leg Squats

Too much strength will never be a weakness, but misappropriating time, energy, and precious adaptive reserves to continually pursue strength just might be. Not all strengths are created equal, so it is important to know the demands of your sport. While all sports require a well-rounded approach to both absolute and relative strength development, it is important to know what is most valuable to you and your athletes so you can “lean” accordingly.

For instance, my experience has shown that relative strength is of slightly greater value to my soccer athletes than absolute strength. Conversely, the opposite would likely be true for an offensive lineman in football. I develop and maintain absolute strength for our soccer athletes with conventional squats, deadlifts, presses, and pulls using basic progressive overload principles. Appropriate strength work should supplement on-field movement by enhancing an athlete’s resilience and force-producing capabilities.

Despite being the most general of all forms of preparation, quality strength work should also establish principles that will carry over to more specific iterations of prep such as power and speed exercises. Specifically, posture is critical, particularly as it relates to pelvic position. If the load or speed begins to negatively affect posture, it is dialed back until the athlete is capable.

One of the biggest things I have noticed with soccer athletes is that there is a point of diminishing returns as it relates to absolute strength, but seemingly unlimited performance potential as it relates to relative strength. This is exactly why I chose to highlight pull-ups, dips, and one-legged squats. These specific exercises demonstrate mastery over how well an athlete can move their own body mass and typically present some of the most difficult bodyweight exercises, particularly for young athletes.

One of the biggest things with soccer athletes is a point of diminishing returns as it relates to absolute strength, but seemingly unlimited performance potential as it relates to relative strength. Share on X

In my pursuit of bang for the buck exercises, time invested in these full-body displays of relative strength render the pursuit of more remedial exercises a waste of time (unless, of course, those exercises are in fact an intermediate or developmental step to a pull-up, dip, or single-leg squat). To clarify, I value these three tasks because of their higher degree of difficulty and the innate core stability, balance, and total body awareness necessary to demonstrate them.

More traditional relative strength tests such as the push-up and sit-up test fall short on this front. They could be a means of assistance in the development of the “Big Three,” but not the end goals themselves. I want my athletes to be able to perform 10 strict reps for all the exercises and on both legs for the single-leg squat. If athletes have not yet achieved this standard, keep developing; and if they have, add load.

Sprint

They say to save the best for last, so now I must mention the most delicate and difficult skill to teach: sprinting. The total body coordination and the stress imposed make max effort sprinting the consummate demonstration of athleticism. To optimize effectiveness, sprinting cannot be done haphazardly. Speed work should be done fresh, with full recovery between reps, and reps should last no longer than roughly five seconds.

Full recovery for ATP stores to replenish is widely accepted as one minute of rest for every 10 yards sprinted. Pragmatically, for a developing youth athlete, this is roughly 30-40 total yards of maximum intent, at most. Due to the potency, the total volume of sprints should be limited to approximately 150 yards per session, and sessions should only be administered two to three times a week to push progress, and always done at least once a week to maintain.

As the ultimate performance enhancer and soft tissue inoculant, the dosage and timing of dosage must to be treated with respect. Speed work should also be objectified to chart progress. For the past two years, I have used Freelap Timing for all our academy athletes’ speed sessions, as well as my personal speed sessions. Freelap is easy to transport and just as easy to quickly set up anywhere. Accuracy and precision are the two most desirable attributes of any tool used for measurement, and Freelap fills the bill on both counts.

The ‘L’ in LTAD

The era in which young multisport athletes were prevalent might be ending; and, in any case, the days of early specialization are likely here to stay. There are many challenges that accompany early specificity in young athletes, but a more imaginative approach to performance training can combat these drawbacks. I have provided specific insight to the limitations I have experienced in working with youth soccer athletes and the methods I have used to try to address those gaps.

There are many challenges that accompany early specificity in young athletes, but a more imaginative approach to performance training can combat these drawbacks, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

Every scenario and sport will have its own subtleties and nuances that require attention, so there is no right or wrong. I am merely encouraging critical thought to fill the voids and supplement accordingly, as I feel strongly it is our job within the performance field to identify and fix problems and not just identify them. I actually look forward to watching the growth and maturation of young athletes who are extra passionate about their craft, as they will push the boundaries of what we thought was possible in each individual sport—that is, provided we do our jobs by keeping them healthy and fully prepared.

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

Verkhoshansky, Y.V. and Siff, M.C. Supertraining. 1999. p. 264.

Radcliffe, J.C. and Farentinos, R.C. High-Powered Plyometrics. 1999.

Athletes need to be in peak condition all year round. This doesn’t just mean focusing on muscular development, strength, and speed; you must also ensure that the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems are primed to the perfection of a diesel engine, pumping blood and oxygen to muscles as they continually strive to push the limits of what is physically possible for the human body.

Our hearts are the hardest working muscle in our bodies, and cardio workouts are the key to improved function, as they make the heart go beyond what it’s used to. An effective way for athletes to incorporate cardio into their workout regime is to train on an e-bike.

An effective way for athletes to incorporate cardio into their workout regime is to train on an e-bike. Share on X

Staying Fit On an E-Bike for Athletes

Thanks in part to electric bikes, cycling is seeing a resurgence around the world among the general public. E-bikes are typically recommended for those looking for a recreational sport activity or who are just getting started on their fitness journey. However, athletes and advanced bikers can also benefit from them in many ways!

1. Increases the Efficiency of Your Heart

An efficient heart can pump more blood into the muscles with fewer beats per minute. Since blood is the medium through which essential nutrients, including oxygen, are delivered to our muscles, a more efficient heart directly translates into better athletic performance.

E-bike workouts are a great form of cardio because they get your heart rate going. Contrary to popular belief, they offer the same cardiovascular health benefits as a conventional bicycle. While e-bikes do come with a handy pedal-assist feature, it doesn’t mean you won’t pedal at all.

Riding an e-bike usually takes half your energy compared to what it would have taken you on a pedal bike. So you will be burning a large number of calories but not to the point of exhausting yourself completely.

Since an e-bike takes less effort, it has a calorie burn rate that’s closer to what you would get from walking. That said, you could change your speed, ride on an economy setting, or add some ankle weights to increase the intensity of your workout.

2. Improves Your VO2 Max

One of the most important parameters for measuring athletic performance is VO2 max. Put simply, it is the maximum amount of oxygen your body can consume during a workout. Since oxygen is the fuel that the body burns to produce energy, a greater VO2 max directly translates into better athletic performance—especially in sports that require a greater intensity of physical activity.

One of the most important parameters for measuring athletic performance is VO2 max. Share on X

Here’s the interesting thing, though: professional cyclists have some of the highest VO2 max levels on the planet. The Norwegian cyclist Oskar Svendsen, for instance, is reported to have the highest VO2 max ever recorded in a human being at 97.5 mL/Kg/min (the average human being has a VO2 max range of 40-45).

The list of highest recorded VO2 maximums has a disproportionately high number of cyclists at the top, with three-time Tour de France winner Greg Le Mond recording a VO2 max of 92.5 and the American professional cyclist Lance Armstrong recording 85.

Of course, not every athlete is training to be a professional cyclist, nor do they need these superhuman levels of oxygen burning capacity. However, practically all athletes can benefit from higher VO2 max levels, and cycling is one of the best ways to improve it.

3. Puts Less Strain on Your Joints

Athletes are more susceptible to joint pain, especially in the knees, due to excessive workouts and constant fitness training. Luckily, electric bikes can help you stay fit without putting much strain on your joints and muscles.

Electric bikes can help you stay fit without putting much strain on your joints and muscles. Share on X

Think of an e-bike workout like swimming—you work your heart, you burn a lot of calories, and you work your muscles—all without putting a lot of strain on your joints. Another close comparison would be an elliptical trainer that delivers benefits while going easy on the joints. However, unlike a stationary elliptical trainer, you can actually take your e-bike out for a spin or even commute to work.

The pedal-assist feature makes you move faster without pedaling too hard, taking the strain away from your knees. The throttle is another component that uses extra electricity to push your bike automatically ahead so you can skip pedaling altogether if you’re exhausted or riding uphill.

This way, e-bikes ensure that athletes still get a great workout without damaging their joints or worsening an ongoing knee problem.

4. Makes Training on Your Commute Easy

Any experienced cyclist knows that you need to train as often as possible to extend your range. It can be hard to get at least two to three hours of moderate-intensity workouts every week with a busy schedule, but commuting to work on a bicycle makes it possible. However, riding an e-bike to work has some added advantages over a traditional cycle.

Riding an e-bike to work has some added advantages over a traditional cycle. Share on X

E-bikes come with several modes that you can switch between based on how much you’re willing to exert yourself. You can seamlessly change from riding without using the battery to using the throttle if you’re tired or experiencing muscular fatigue. This means you can easily opt for longer rides and won’t be exhausted by the time you reach your office.

5. Aids Weight Loss

Athletes must be a certain weight for specific sports like gymnastics, boxing, and martial arts. If you play these sports and are trying to qualify for a weight division, e-biking can help you shed the excess pounds in time for a tournament.

As stated earlier, e-bikes allow you to burn calories and fat nearly as effectively as a conventional bike does—even with the pedal-assist mode on. Of course, to reach your desired weight goal, it’s important to pay attention to your diet as well.

6. Stimulates Your Muscles

Athletes looking to train their legs every day will find that cycling is a great exercise. If you’ve observed a professional cyclist closely, you will know that they have very well-developed leg muscles, including quadriceps and calves. It not only strengthens your lower body and eliminates any signs of stiffness but can also help athletes build better overall endurance.

Just like a conventional bike, every pedal stroke on an e-bike stimulates your quads and hamstrings, one of the major muscle groups in the human body. Since e-bikes are a little heavier, they also help you lose weight and tone your calf muscles. In fact, an electric bike can exercise your glutes, biceps, triceps, and abs, too.

Just like a conventional bike, every pedal stroke on an e-bike stimulates your quads and hamstrings, one of the major muscle groups in the human body. Share on X

7. Boosts Your Riding Time

Getting an e-bike means athletes can ride more often and for greater distances. Most people find that their weekly ride times increase as cycling becomes easier and more fun. The various e-bike modes allow you to keep your workouts flexible and gradually enhance your speed, range, and overall performance.

8. Encourages You to Explore New Terrains

Remember that childhood thrill of exploration when you went around the neighborhood on your bicycle with the wind in your hair, the sun on your back, and the world looking brand new, ready to be explored?

An e-bike is a perfect way to return to that childhood joy of cycling, as unlike a conventional bicycle, it makes the transition from four wheels to two a lot smoother. Whether you’re an avid mountain biker or just want to make your training experiences more fun, an e-bike is perfect for expeditions that blend the thrill of exploration with the fun of cycling.

Based on the motor that you use, e-bikes make it possible for athletes to explore different routes across a variety of terrains. Electric bikes with a larger motor allow for better control over rocky and slippery surfaces. They also give you greater power so you can traverse up a steep incline.

E-Bikes for Sports Rehab

Sports rehab helps injured athletes get back to training after an injury without putting them at risk. E-bikes are great for sports rehab as they allow you to exercise without putting much strain on the body, helping you build your body back safely.

E-bikes are great for sports rehab as they allow you to exercise without putting much strain on the body. Share on X

To start with this rehab, you might use the e-bike first to go through the cycling motion and slowly use it. You can rely on the motor and use as little energy of your own as you want. Once the body gets used to those motions, you can gradually reduce the motor power and start generating your own strength, bringing the body back to use.

Getting back to doing physical activity after an injury can be a huge addition to an athlete’s life as it brings back momentum and joy that they might have felt was lost. This kind of progressive sports rehab plan will help the athlete achieve whatever goal they are aiming for and get back to their original strength levels.

Personalized Workouts

Any workout depends on how frequently one does it and how much effort is used. E-bikes are great in the sense that one can adjust the level of assistance they require. This makes the cardio intense if the setting chosen is lower. Hence, you will use a lot more force, put in more effort, and give your heart a great and powerful workout.

Do keep in mind that riding Class 2 e-bikes does not require pedaling since a throttle propels them. So, for cardio workouts, your best option is to go for a Class 1 (low speed) or Class 3 (high speed) e-bike, both of which require pedaling.

E-bikes make a great option for all ages and bodies. So even though normal pedal bikes are more demanding physically, the amount of time spent on an e-bike is usually higher, which means sufficient cardio workouts.

E-bikes make a great option for all ages and bodies. Share on X

High-Intensity Workouts

High impact workouts can help athletes raise their heart rate and oxygen levels, and quickly burn a lot of calories. Training at a higher intensity level means you control the effort you put in while maintaining a higher intensity than with a normal bike.

It’s possible to enjoy a high-intensity interval ride on an e-bike by riding up a steep hill without any pedal assistance for short intervals.

But the pedal assist feature of an e-bike can help you achieve a heart rate ideal for trimming fat or increasing aerobic activity, hitting new levels of progress and personal records. All of this has a big impact both on your rides and your fitness level.

Low-Impact Workouts

E-bikes offer a low-impact exercise that is easier on the body without compromising your fitness levels. Athletes that want a more relaxed workout can leverage the various modes on an e-bike and choose when to decrease or increase pedal assist.

E-bikes offer a low-impact exercise that is easier on the body without compromising your fitness levels. Share on X

Pedaling your e-bike on a flat surface for a long time can increase the volume of oxygen in your muscles and elevate your endurance levels without putting too much pressure on your joints.

These workouts translate well to sprinting. It will help in the last part of your sprint or the climb whenever a new challenge arrives.

Example of an E-Bike Workout

You can design many types of workouts for your e-bike. One of those is a simple cardiovascular workout, which requires constant pedaling for 20+ minutes. This makes your heart rate pump blood at the maximum pressure and increases the uptake of oxygen.

Here’s a sample cardio workout that you can use to get started:

• A few minutes of easy riding (approx. 5 minutes)
• 10 sets of 20-25 seconds with hard effort
• 30-40 seconds of recovery
• Gradually ease the pedal (approx. 5 minutes)
• Pedal for 20 minutes with moderate intensity
• Take a 15-second sprint jumping out of the saddle
• Final 5-minute easy pedal

If you do this, then congrats—you’ve done a comprehensive 45-minute cardio workout on your e-bike!

Conclusion

Athletes and fitness training enthusiasts are always on the lookout for ways to improve their performance and efficiency, and riding an e-bike makes for the perfect physical activity or exercise that can help athletes stay fit and have fun at the same time.

E-bikes are a great tool for sports rehab and can slowly bring back physical activity and joy to an athlete’s life. They are ideal in times of injury, allowing pros and elites to practice while also letting their body heal.

You can design your own personal workouts and choose whether you want to be doing high-intensity or low-intensity workouts. All this will help you stay fit on an e-bike as an athlete.

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

The basic, foundational principles of block periodization provide a solid basis for us to plan our athletes’ training. However, it’s important for a coach to understand how to evolve the block model beyond the textbook example—while still using those foundational principles—in order to truly optimize the results for our athletes. To take your block periodized plan to the next level, first it’s important to understand a couple aspects of block periodization that often get overlooked and misunderstood.

Once we nail those ideas down, figuring out how to tailor your annual periodized plan to the nuances we deal with as strength coaches is vital to our athletes’ success. For example: what differences in periodization should we make for relatively untrained and weak athletes versus trained and relatively strong athletes? And how should an off-season cycle of accumulation, transmutation, and realization phases differ from the cycle closest to the season?

Understanding two often-overlooked (but critical) concepts can help our periodized plan evolve—along with our athletes’ success.

1. Concentrated Loading: The “Backburner” Concept

I often hear a critical mistake by strength coaches: believing that training in a certain “block” means you can ONLY train that aspect of fitness. This is one of the things I see getting frequently misinterpreted about block periodization. I often hear coaches say, The problem with block periodization is that in a *true block model* you can’t sprint during a maximal strength block!

I often hear a critical mistake by strength coaches: believing that training in a certain ‘block’ means you can ONLY train that aspect of fitness, says @Trader_Flora. Share on X

Luckily, that’s not the case at all—in fact, this idea is shot down by the pioneers of block periodization.

Block periodization, mainly coined by Issurin in the 1980s, was largely based off of work by Verkoshansky, in his Conjugative Successive System.¹ During each block of training, a certain fitness characteristic is emphasized while others are de-emphasized (but not excluded altogether); this is the concept of creating a “concentrated load.”² In addition to Verkoshanky’s definition of a concentrated load, Dr. Michael “Doc” Stone emphasizes the importance of “combination training”—a method of programming higher-velocity movements during strength blocks³. This can include the use of:

• Hi/Lo programming model: “Lower intensity days,” where load is decreased so the speed of movement (and most likely power output) increases.
• Down sets: A set with lowered load that follows the working sets; again, to increase velocity of the movement.
• Sprints and plyometrics
  • Ballistic training also has been shown to have a positive influence on performance^4-6 (think everything from plyos to loaded jumps to Olympic lifts).
• Complexes and contrast sets

Again, all during a strength block³. This is often referred to as “surfing the force velocity curve.” Combination training has been shown to be effective in producing a wider variety of speed and power adaptations than isolated heavy training^7-10, which is important for athletes who require speed and power for their sport.

*Key Point: During block periodization, you simply emphasize the goal characteristic, while you de-emphasize the rest (not eliminate them altogether.) Think of it this way—as you prioritize one training variable, you put the others on the back burner. You don’t kick the other fitness characteristics completely to the curb, you simply give more attention to the “concentrated load,” the main focus of that block of training. Those characteristics you momentarily de-emphasized will get emphasized later on, just at a more appropriate time of the year. This is often termed “multivariable” or “multidirectional” block periodization and is ideal for team sport athletes who rely on multiple different fitness characteristics in order to excel in their sport.

Residual Training Effects and Phase Potentiation

It’s important to note that there is a benefit of cycling through training blocks in a sequential manner. This is partially based on the concept of residual training effects (RTEs).¹¹ RTEs indicate that the positive adaptations from training remain for some time after training is completed.

For example, maximal strength gains remain for about 30 days post-training for maximal strength.¹¹ You can see how RTEs help justify the “back burner” and “concentrated load” concepts we just discussed: An athlete doesn’t have to consistently train for every aspect of fitness and instead can prioritize some time for training other training characteristics, such as speed and power, without fear of losing maximal strength.

RTEs allow for the main benefit of sequentially planning your training blocks: phase potentiation. Phase potentiation means the adaptations from one training phase have an additional positive impact on the subsequent phases of training.

Phase potentiation means the adaptations from one training phase have an additional positive impact on the subsequent phases of training, says @Trader_Flora. Share on X

For example, a strength endurance phase—with emphasis on improving body composition and work capacity—may potentiate a sport-specific hypertrophy phase undergoing heavy sets of mainly 5-6 repetitions, targeting an increase in type II muscle fibers.¹² Further, this increase in type II fiber CSA could benefit the following training block, which targets maximal strength.¹² Finally, an increase in maximal force production can then benefit the adaptation seen in a realization phase focusing on speed and power.^{4, 13-15}

The realization phase may also help transfer the newfound force production into the athlete’s sport performance, as maximal force production often expresses a delayed training effect.¹⁶ This is how one phase of training may improve your adaptation in the next phase of training, leading to huge improvements in important performance characteristics—ideally, you plan to “peak” at the right time of year!

Variation Throughout the Annual Plan

Before we get into varying the periodized plan for different athletes, let’s touch generally on how the annual plan should (usually) evolve throughout the year.

Let’s use a hypothetical annual plan so we can discuss the variance of the block cycles.

At first glance, we notice how we cycle through sequences of accumulation, transmutation, and realization periods repeatedly throughout the year, before we get to the competition period. Basic block model stuff. But, if you look closely, you may notice that there are some subtle differences in blocks between the first cycle and the cycles that follow.

In general: the first accumulation phase will most often be the longest, most substantial of the accumulation phases you complete throughout the year. This makes logical sense for a couple reasons.

1. This concept fits the mold of your typical off-season training/GPP. When our athletes are this far out from competition, the priority of training often shifts toward the weight room. Each athlete has only so much fatigue they can endure, and during the off-season, we as strength coaches are afforded a larger slice of that fatigue pie.
2. Practices for sport are most often less intense: we see fewer scrimmages, more individual/skill work, less CNS usage at practice, and less time spent on their sport. Here we can take advantage of this emphasis shift and really work on building superb fitness in the weight room. This is especially done during the first accumulation phase, which consists of higher volumes, and is aimed primarily at strength endurance, body composition, and work ^{17, 11} (Some of the recent work by Schoenfield et al. dives into how hypertrophy is best established through relatively higher volumes, although a range probably exists.^{18, 19})

In contrast, look at the third cycle’s accumulation phase: much shorter and less dense. This may resemble the typical block model idea of “reestablishing the base.” As we get closer to season, sport coaches get the larger share of the fatigue pie as practice starts ramping up. Scrimmage frequencies increase, hours on the field/court increase, and so does CNS usage. As strength coaches, we don’t have the time or fatigue share to implement another long, super-strenuous strength endurance block.

This is one of the key principles of block periodization: capitalizing on the fatigue fitness paradigm and RTEs by returning to accumulation phases throughout the annual plan, says @Trader_Flora. Share on X

Instead, we take just enough time to reestablish fitness and prevent detraining. This is one of the key principles of block periodization: capitalizing on the fatigue fitness paradigm and RTEs by returning to accumulation phases throughout the annual plan. You can’t train general fitness characteristics all year ’round—it’s too fatiguing. But you can’t exclude them forever, or the athletes will lose the adaptations made from these previous blocks. Therefore, during that last cycle of blocks, the shortened accumulation phase is programmed 1-3 months out from the season (eliminating excess fatigue at competition), and then we quickly start moving into the transmutation and realization phases, because—and here’s the real kicker—those phases train the variables more related to sport!

2. More Emphasis Gets Placed on the Realization Phase Closer to Season

Around the time of the season starting, we increase emphasis on the realization phase—as we know, these variables are the most closely related to sport performance. It’s time to maximize the power output in our athletes and increase speed, in addition to reducing excess fatigue generated in the weight room. This is the time of year to spend more effort and energy on increasing the variables related to performance, because this is the time the athletes need it most!

In order to achieve adaptations in speed and power, we often sharply decrease volume of training, along with decreasing load, which increases the speed of the movement.^{13, 20, 21} Suarez et al. (2019) discuss and provide evidence for Verkhoshansky’s principle of “Dynamic Correspondence,” in which several factors should be considered in increasing the transfer of training to sport. These factors include:²²

• Amplitude and direction of movements.
• Accentuated regions of force production.
• Dynamics of effort.
• Rate and time of maximum force production.
• Regimen of muscular work.

The realization phase is additionally important because of the delayed training effect of strength. Strength is an important vehicle for many factors (including RFD, power, speed) and is especially important in weaker athletes^{4, 13-15}, yet it takes time for our system to learn how to synchronize, coordinate, and express that newfound force production in high-velocity movements.¹⁶ So, the realization phase is a great time to help speed up that learning curve and increase the transfer of training to sport.

The realization phase is more heavily emphasized as we near the season—you can think of it as a spectrum of emphasis and density throughout the year, with accumulation phases holding a higher priority in the off-season and realization phases taking the lead in the preseason. If you remember how we discussed concentrated loading, one quality gets emphasized while the others get de-emphasized, but not eliminated altogether. For example, of course you’re going to want to maintain muscle CSA/tissue quality during a realization phase, it’s just placed on the backburner (maintenance) as strength/power become the main focuses for improvement.

During the off-season, the realization phase might not just be shorter—it might even vary in composition. The typical realization phase dedicated to power production would usually be found in the preseason. But, assuming your team doesn’t compete in games that count toward its record at the end of off-season GPP, you may prioritize the need to gain maximal strength, instead of having an entire block dedicated solely to power during the off-season. You can do this by programming a realization phase dedicated to strength/maximal force production (check out the chart below). Remember, if you use combination training, you can most likely increase strength AND power!

When you look at the focus of the blocks in a cycle, you see how the off-season resembles the typical GPP (prioritizes hypertrophy, strength endurance, work capacity, and maximal strength), where the next cycles represent a SPP and preseason, geared toward preparing for games (strength, power, and speed).

Of course, you have to know the rules before you bend them. This can vary amongst different situations, sports, and individual athletes—especially the advanced athletes. So let’s talk about that: how the block periodized plan can differ from athlete to athlete, based on their needs.

Individualization

I think we can all agree, a long, lanky freshman who squats just over 1x his body weight (BW) should probably be training a little differently than a junior who has filled out with some lean muscle mass and squats nearly 2x his BW.

So, how do we tweak the block periodized plan to fit the needs of each athlete?

Priority: Requires Basic Strength (Low-Hanging Fruit)

Our first hypothetical athlete has a very young training age and an estimated back squat 1RM of 185 pounds (which isn’t much more than his body weight of 165 pounds, despite being 6 feet tall). You get the picture.

*For the sake of the discussion, let’s assume the athlete has mastered movement quality already, and we’re ready to move on to handling some load.*

As mentioned, strength is a vehicle¹⁵ that leads to power adaptations. It has been shown that relatively untrained athletes increase power variables just as much through strength training as power training alone. ^3,13,14 This is why we can mostly agree that building a good strength base is the low-hanging fruit for younger, untrained athletes.

For this athlete, let’s prioritize just that: building a strength base. A good secondary goal might be building some lean muscle mass. It’s pretty common (and logical) that weaker, young athletes lack this along with their strength deficiency. Not only should that increase in muscle mass help improve strength, but hopefully it can help build some resiliency in the athlete.

With these goals in mind, here’s the first practical application of the annual plan:

• Since the priority is the low-hanging fruit of building baseline strength, we don’t have to necessarily isolate entire blocks to training power. Strength blocks will likely help increase power just as well.
  • Of course, we’ll still include combination training of “Hi/Lo” days to promote good fatigue management and include sprints and plyometrics to aid in power production.^3,7-10

Now that we have our goal in mind, we can reverse engineer the training process for our young, untrained, relatively weak athlete:

We can still see how these blocks fit the block periodization model, progressing from general to specific in regard to our goals. Additionally, one phase still potentiates the next, as increases in lean muscle mass and work capacity may help potentiate strength gains. And, of course, we can repeat this cycle after the three blocks are completed. This will help reestablish the base and continue building fitness in the form of lean muscle mass and work capacity. Another block spent building the base should additionally help promote further gains in strength during the ensuing strength blocks.

Priority: Power Development (More Advanced Athlete)

Our next athlete may best resemble a rising junior or senior that has been in your program for some time. Not only does he have several years’ experience under his belt, he’s built quite a strength base. He already back squats 2x his bodyweight at a nice and lean 210 pounds. He plays a power/speed sport (let’s say baseball).

Unlike our last athlete, there’s probably a diminished return on investment for setting our #1 priority as increasing his maximal force production. First off, how long will it take to increase his back squat? Five to six months of dedicated training? And how much benefit will he see on the field from the six months it took you to increase his back squat from 420 to 440?

The juice just isn’t worth the squeeze.

Instead, increasing his power output/RFD will more likely improve his on-field production. He saw significant gains over the years in power from prioritizing strength development, but as we mentioned, there’s a diminishing return here. Therefore, we should approach his power output/RFD qualities directly.

Because we know strength is a vehicle, we won’t disregard it completely, but we’ll put more emphasis on power. Let’s reverse engineer what this might look like:

In contrast to the younger athlete, we move more quickly from maintaining the base (one of the highlights of block periodization) to maximal force production.

The programming of this transmutation max strength block is more advanced, as we may add higher loads at reps of 2, along with possibly adding contrast sets or complexes. These methods are reserved for the more advanced athlete, as it takes stronger athletes to be able to handle the workload and benefit most. If the athlete can thrive with these methods, they’re great at increasing power and speed.¹⁰

Since that’s the main goal, I’d still recommend programming a Hi/Lo model. Those lowered intensity days that resemble a strength-speed loading scheme for your primary lifts are not only a great starting point to train maximum power production, but also aid with fatigue management. (In a great review, Soriano, Jiménez, Rhea, and Marín found that peak power from the back squat may be produced at a load of 70% 1RM or less, for example.²³) Including these “Lo” days is a great segue to get used to moving loads quickly before going straight into speed-strength work (somewhere below 50% 1RM).

If our strength block focused primarily on strength and secondarily on power, our realization phase flips the emphasis, prioritizing power output. We’ve all heard a dozen different names describing this phase of training, from “strength speed” to a “power block” to “high force at high velocity.” In any case, you know the adaptation I’m talking about—you decrease the loads on your primary lifts (typically below 80%, depending upon who you ask) without increasing the reps, and emphasize the velocity of the movement in order to increase power output. Slice the percentage how you want, we’re aiming to increase power output. Of course, you can insert your preferred method of training here: clusters, VBT, you name it.

One piece of practical advice: Use the tools available to monitor power production. Not only is immediate feedback a great motivator^24-26, but the only way to make sure you’re training powerfully and at maximal intent is to measure it.

The point is, we’re training power and RFD directly. And we can do this for about 28 days (four weeks) without fear of losing maximal strength, thanks to the RTE. You may also opt to keep strength as a secondary focus, by including something fancy like of one-third pin squats (or something related) after your power work to maintain strength without the fatigue.

The point is, we’re training power and RFD directly. And we can do this for about 28 days without fear of losing maximal strength, thanks to the residual training effort (RTE), says @Trader_Flora. Share on X

This cycle of blocks more accurately reflects the needs of an athlete with a quality strength base, dedicating time to directly train and increase power and speed. Additionally, the cycles can vary throughout the annual plan like we discussed earlier. The cycle demonstrated above may be their off-season cycle, while the pre-season cycle may shift away from accumulation on the emphasis spectrum, toward an emphasis on realization.

One possible way of going about this would be by programming a brief accumulation of 5-6 reps, as work by Schoenfield et al. supports that you can see meaningful hypertrophy by using various rep ranges.^18,19 By working at the higher load ranges around 6, which is probably right in the middle of the strength and hypertrophy spectrum, we’re going to attack type II fibers more.¹² This may be more appropriate for the last cycle before season (less overall volume, more specific).

The abbreviated accumulation is followed by a transmutation of strength 3’s with considerable focus on power production, followed by a realization phase of speed-strength loading, dropping the weight, and increasing the velocity even more. You can see the difference in the last cycle of the annual plan. This may be ideal for maximum transfer of training, and it’s a good time too, since the season is about to start!

Adapting Foundations to Your Needs

It’s important to understand how you can tweak your block periodized program in different scenarios, helping your athletes to reach their various goals and better fit different parts of the annual plan. As long as you stick within the confines of the foundational block principles, you can still reap their benefits (phase potentiation, capitalizing on the fatigue fitness paradigm, etc.).

This article introduced a couple examples of how you can evolve your block-periodized model to fit different scenarios without completely throwing the foundational pillars of block periodization to the wayside. Although the specific programming methods I used as examples are just that—examples—the purpose here is get your grey matter turning and show just a few of the ways to fit your programming to the situation at hand.

By implementing your choice methods into the foundational principles of block periodization, you’ll find a useful way to organize your annual plan to match the demands of the sport.

By implementing your choice methods into the foundational principles of block periodization, you’ll find a useful way to organize your annual plan to match the demands of the sport. Share on X

There are, of course, more ways to tweak the periodized plan—in addition to the alterations I described, there may be times when you need to repeat blocks back-to-back (in order to accumulate sufficient levels of hypertrophy in a powerlifter, for example). Most of my examples were directed toward team sports, but again, this model can be tweaked for sports or different types of athletes. As I mentioned, you just have to know how to play by the rules before you bend them.

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. Stone, M.H. 2012. “Periodization and Programming for Strength Power Sports – the Short Reader’s Digest Version.” Invited Presentation. NSCA Coaches Conference, San Antonio TX. YouTube.

2. Verkhoshansky, Y.V. (1985): Programming and organization of training. (Translated by A. Charniga, Published by Sportivny Press, Livonia, MI, 1988.) Fizkultura i Spovt, Moscow, U.S.S.R.

3. Stone, M.H., Stone, M., and Lamont, H. “Explosive exercise.” National Strength and Conditioning Association Journal. 2008;15(4),7-15.

4. Cormie, P., McGuigan, M.R., and Newton, R.U. “Adaptations in Athletic Performance after Ballistic Power versus Strength Training.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise.2010;42:1582-1598.

5. McEvoy, K.P. and Newton, R.U. “Baseball throwing speed and base running speed: The effects of ballistic resistance training.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 1998;12:216-221.

6. Newton, R.U., Kraemer, W., and Hakkinen, K. “Effects of ballistic training on preseason preparation of elite volleyball players.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1999;31(2):323-330.

7. Fatouros, I.G., Jamurtas, A.Z., Leontsini, D., et al. “Evaluation of Plyometric Exercise Training, Weight Training, and Their Combination on Vertical Jumping Performance and Leg Strength.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2000;14(4):470. doi:10.1519/1533-4287(2000)014<0470:eopetw>2.0.co;2

8. Harris, G.R., Stone, M.H., OʼBryant, H.S., Proulx, C.M., and Johnson, R.L. “Short-Term Performance Effects of High Power, High Force, or Combined Weight-Training Methods.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2000;14(1):14-20. doi:10.1519/00124278-200002000-00003.

9. Kotzamanidis, C., Chatzopoulos, D., Michailidis, C., Papaiakovou, G., and Patikas, D. “The effect of a combined high-intensity strength and speed training program on the running and jumping ability of soccer players.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2005 May;19(2):369-375. doi: 10.1519/R-14944.1. PMID: 15903377.

10. Marshall, J., Bishop, C., Turner, A.N., and Haff, G.G. “Optimal Training Sequences to Develop Lower Body Force, Velocity, Power, and Jump Height: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.” Sports Medicine. 2021;51(3).

11. Issurin, V. “Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review.” The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 2008;48(1):65-75.

12. Travis, S.K., Ishida, A., Taber, C.B., Fry, A.C., and Stone, M.H. “Emphasizing Task-Specific Hypertrophy to Enhance Sequential Strength and Power Performance.” Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology. 2020;5(76). doi:10.3390/jfmk5040076.

13. Cormie, P., McGuigan, M.R., and Newton, R.U. “Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 2—training considerations for improving maximal power production.” Sports Medicine. 2011;41(2):125+.

14. James, L.P., Haff, G.G., Kelly, V.G., Connick, M.J., Hoffman, B.W., and Beckman, E.M. “The impact of strength level on adaptations to combined weightlifting, plyometric, and ballistic training.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports. 2018;28(5):1494-1505.

15. Suchomel, T.J., Nimphius, S., and Stone, M.H. “The Importance of Muscular Strength in Athletic Performance.” Sports Medicine. 2016;46(10):1419-1449. doi:10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0.

16. Burnie, L., Barratt, P., Davids, K., Stone, J., Worsfold, P., and Wheat, J. “Coaches’ philosophies on the transfer of strength training to elite sports performance.” International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching. 2018;13(5):729-736.

17. DeWeese, B.H, Hornsby, G., Stone, M.E., and Stone, M.H. “The training process: Planning for strength–power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical aspects,” Journal of Sport and Health Science. 2015;4(4):308-317.

18. Schoenfeld, B.J., Peterson, M.D., Ogborn, D., Contreras, B., and Sonmez, G.T. “Effects of Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy in Well-Trained Men.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2015;29:2954-2963.

19. Schoenfeld, B.J., Grgic, J., Van Every, D.W., and Plotkin, D.L. “Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum.” Sports. 2021;9(32).

20. Haff, G.G., Whitley, A., and Potteiger, J.A. “A Brief Review: Explosive Exercises and Sports Performance.” Strength & Conditioning Journal. 2001;23(3):13.

21. Wilson, G.J., Newton, R.U., Murphy, A.J., and Humphries, B.J. “The optimal training load for the development of dynamic athletic performance.” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1993;25(11):1279-1286.

22. Suarez, D.G., Wagle, J.P., Cunanan, A.J., Sausaman, R.W., and Stone, M.H. “Dynamic Correspondence of Resistance Training to Sport: A Brief Review.” Strength and Conditioning Journal. 2019;41(4). Retrieved December 2, 2020.

23. Soriano, M.A., Jiménez-Reyes, P., Rhea, M.R., and Marín, P. J. “The Optimal Load for Maximal Power Production During Lower-Body Resistance Exercises: A Meta-Analysis.” Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.). 2015;45(8):1191-1205.

24. Weakley, J.J.S., Wilson, K.M., Till, K., et al. “Visual kinematic feedback enhances velocity, power, motivation and competitiveness in adolescent female athletes.” The Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning. 2019;27(3):16-22.

25. Weakley, J.J.S., Wilson, K.M., Till, K., et al. “Visual feedback attenuates mean concentric barbell velocity loss and improves motivation, competitiveness, and perceived workload in male adolescent athletes.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2019;33(9):2420-2425.

26. Weakley, J.J.S., Wilson, K.M., Till, K., et al. “Show me, tell me, encourage me: the effect of different forms of feedback on resistance training performance.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2020;34(11):3157-3163.