Blog

Anyone who has worked with athletes has observed how rare it is for them to get identical results from the exact same routine. Although trends may be similar within a group, there are inevitably some athletes who produce better results while others are stagnant or regress. Using the latest technological advancements in sport and exercise science gives us some insight into the variation from individual to individual in order to either capitalize on their strengths or try and improve areas that are holding them back.

Metabolic testing, such as expired gas analysis and blood lactate levels, helps to determine whole body energy demands—particularly for aerobic and anaerobic lactate events. Appropriately matched external performance measures, such as power, force, and speed assessments, are excellent for monitoring individual response from a training routine, validating a successful training phase, or monitoring recovery. Neuromuscular assessment by surface EMG (electromyography) helps to connect the dots between the neural response and the performance outcome during a training environment or competition.

This—EMG—is a key factor that I considered one of the missing links for finding appropriate individual exercise prescription.

(Bipolar surface) EMG is a key factor that I considered one of the missing links for finding appropriate individual exercise prescription. Share on X

With this goal in mind, finding the most appropriate system for my needs was no easy task. In the end, I invested in a wireless 8 EMG sensor system and inertial sensor (G-Sensor 2) from BTS Bioengineering. I chose BTS Bioengineering because:

• They have been in the business of motion analysis for more than 25 years.
• Their sensors have been validated and used in peer-reviewed scientific research.
• The products have been used in a variety of medical, sport, and aerospace applications.

Although EMG has been very well researched over the decades (a quick Google Scholar search returns 27,600 articles for 2020 alone), and the technology and interpretation continue to be developed, I have found it is not as commonly applied as an assessment tool in a sport and fitness setting.

To keep it simple for the purpose of this article, I am referring to bipolar surface EMG and not fine wire or multiple-array EMG. Measuring and monitoring the EMG signal tells you several different characteristics of how the muscle is responding, including when the muscle is active (on or off), how much the muscle is active, and how the muscle’s activity is responding to movement and applied force. From these findings, you can extrapolate additional information, such as how that muscle behaves in relation to other muscles and whether or not the muscle is fatiguing.

My interest has always been in the field of muscle strength and hypertrophy, so the ability to finally “see” how a specific muscle responded to a stimulus was exciting.

Muscle Activation: Differences Between Individuals for the Same Exercise

The EMG signal is a measurement of the combined action potentials of the motor units immediately underneath the electrodes and to a certain depth within the muscle. This signal is a combination of the number of motor units, the size of the motor units, the firing rate (or rate coding), motor unit cycling in conditions such as fatigue, and to a certain extent the synchrony to which these motor units fire together.

The last factor is generally believed to not necessarily have a large impact on the signal in most submaximal contractions at moderate speeds. As the Henneman size principle on motor unit recruitment states that motor units recruit from smallest to largest, in the very simplest sense a larger EMG signal is believed to generally be caused by increased motor unit recruitment of progressively larger motor units up to around 80% to 85% of MVC in most muscles. However, all muscles do not behave exactly the same, and a motor unit that is further away from the electrode will give a smaller signal than the actual signal produced, along with changes in firing rate and synchrony that all can ultimately affect the measured signal.

To put it to the test, I examined a former bodybuilder, a current competitive powerlifter, and a recreational lifter on the flat dumbbell press. The latter I had worked with in the past—he had always struggled with chest development and pressing strength.

When comparing three different subjects with three different training histories, one might expect unique recruitment patterns throughout the exercise. The question is, could measuring these unique recruitment patterns bring to light areas where their technique could improve to maximize the effect of the exercise? The hypothesis is that by examining our recreational lifter’s muscle activation pattern against athletes who have had successful results in both strength and hypertrophy, we might gain more insight to help explain his consistent lack of results in this area. Although having athletes to compare results to is definitely a benefit, it is not always required. If the goal is to improve chest development, it would be desirable to see a pattern of higher activation throughout the full range of movement in the pectoralis major.

The setup for this investigation was as follows:

• Four FREEEMG sensors on each side for the pectorals major (sternal portion), anterior deltoid, biceps brachii, and triceps brachii (long head).
• Electrode locations were by established guidelines (SENIAM and Cram’s Introduction to Surface Anatomy, 2nd Ed.)
• The G-Sensor was attached to one of the dumbbells on the dominant side.

Data was collected using EMGAnalyzer software and analyzed with a custom developed protocol with SEMGAnalyzer software, both of which were included with the system. To be able to compare and examine the activation patterns, the EMG signal of the first five repetitions was normalized to the dynamic peak EMG signal (converted into a ratio where the EMG signal is divided by the highest EMG signal during the set of five repetitions) during the exercise. Although, it may have been desirable to compare to an MVC, the issue with collecting several valid MVC for all muscles is that it requires a fair amount of setup and was not possible due to time constraints.

On first glance, the graphs in figure 1 potentially reveal a few insights as to how the nervous system activates the muscles during the movement. Since the graphs are normalized as a percentage of the mean peak activation during the movement, you can see the distinct differences in activation pattern between the three different lifters. In the recreational lifter, mean peak chest activation of approximately 75% occurs on the right side at the end of the movement on lockout versus earlier in the concentric portion with mean peak values closer to 90% for the more experienced lifters.

Although the left side chest activation patterns are closer in similarity between the three, mean peak activation still lags in the fitness enthusiast. Deltoid activity looks similar between the three lifters, but triceps activation has a lower activation level for the bodybuilder compared to both the powerlifter and the enthusiast at the start and mid-point of the concentric portion.

Acceleration and velocity kinematics were collected by the G-Sensor attached to one of the dumbbells on the dominant side. This was necessary in order to determine the lowering phase (eccentric contractions) and the lifting phase (concentric contractions) of the dumbbell during the lift. The ability to collect three-dimensional acceleration, along with orientation angles, can also provide information on the forces applied to the dumbbell.

Remember Newton’s second law of motion that Force = Mass x Acceleration? Since our dumbbell weight doesn’t change for the individual, we can get an idea of the forces acting on the dumbbell caused by the muscles through the acceleration data. We can see the powerlifter moved the dumbbell faster and with a nice, smooth acceleration (and therefore force) curve, versus the wavy graph produced by the others.

So, what does all this mean?

Initially, it appears that the recreational lifter could have less optimal chest activation compared to the others, the bodybuilder potentially has the greatest activation of the chest muscles, and the powerlifter is hitting the “Goldilocks zone” of similar peak activation across all three muscles. Remember, the graphs are the mean values normalized to the peak EMG value obtained during first five repetitions. Values close to 100% in the cycle would suggest consistent activation close to the dynamic peak.

The reverse of this is also true, with a lower percentage representing a consistently lower activation compared to the dynamic peak. Although the biceps brachii does cross the shoulder joint, in this case it is believed to act more like a stabilizer than a strong contributor to the movement. Calculating the mean of both the concentric and eccentric phases is another way to quantify this difference; however, as you can see, during a dynamic contraction the activation changes throughout the movement and a mean value may not tell the whole story.

As in most test situations, more questions are inspired and therefore more testing!

These graphs represent a comparison of three different exercises performed by our fitness subject (flat flys, flat dumbbell press, bench press). In this case, since we are comparing the same muscles in the same individual on the same day without removing the electrodes, with a minimum of five minutes’ rest between submaximal exercises, there is no need to normalize. The readings are the actual voltages in mV read by the FREEEMG sensors.

Interestingly, the same activation in the right pec muscle persists, although left and right activation levels were similar for both flat dumbbell press and flat flys, with the bench press showing a very different pattern between left and right. Another interesting observation is the high activation of the biceps muscle during the fly movement. Although calculating individual forces on muscles within a movement is challenging, to say the least, could we make an argument that the fly exercise could also be considered a bicep exercise due to its biarticular function here?

While the common perception that shifting to dumbbell work results in a more equal left-to-right-side balance, in this case the activation pattern of a U-shaped curve on the right and A-shaped curve on the left persists through both exercises. Could this be a learned neural strategy? A past injury? A technique issue? Could there be an anatomical difference in structure? All are possibly valid theories that would require working with the client to establish a solution to help get them the results they want.

Also, it is important to remember that a greater amplitude does not necessarily mean a stronger muscle. Initially, this may seem counterintuitive, as we are used to seeing increasing graphs resulting in increased strength. In very general terms, an increasing EMG amplitude will often be related to an increase in force in that same muscle. This relationship is not necessarily linear and can be more of a curvilinear relationship in different muscles.

It is important to remember that a greater amplitude does not necessarily mean a stronger muscle. I find it better to think of the EMG amplitude as how hard the muscle is working. Share on X

Instead, I find it better to think of the EMG amplitude as how hard the muscle is working. For example, assuming electrode application is correct and the conditions for signal strength are similar, if the left biceps curls a submaximal weight of 20 pounds and results in an amplitude of 1 mV and the right biceps lifts the same weight but results in a reading of 1.3 mV, you might automatically think the right biceps is stronger. However, if both biceps have a maximum activation level of 1.5 mV during a maximal voluntary contraction, the right biceps is working at 86% activation whereas the left biceps is working at only 67%. In this case, the left is more likely stronger (can produce more force with less activation) than the right and illustrates the importance of normalization of the signals to an associated effort.

Future technique strategies to help our recreational lifter could focus on engaging the right pectoralis muscles at the initiation of the concentric movement by altering arm angle while trying to deactivate synergist muscles such as the anterior deltoid in combination with drawing a stronger mental connection to the muscle’s contribution to the movement. Although the biceps brachii is not particularly active in either press movement, it is significantly higher in the fly movement—most likely as a result of the muscle being placed in a stronger position with the arm extended at the elbow.

If our fitness enthusiast wants to prioritize chest development, bench press may not be the best choice in the short term based on this assessment. This last statement can be a controversial one, as increased EMG activation has not been proven to result in greater hypertrophy. However, at times you have to make a decision based on the best information you have, and I feel that EMG analysis can be a valuable tool to help make those decisions.

The one caveat I am consistently reminded of that is generally true for all assessments, but especially for EMG data collection, is to make sure you have good “clean” data. Skin preparation, electrode choice, exact placement on the targeted muscle, muscle cross talk on small muscles, and the amount of fat tissue between the skin and the muscle can all affect the quality of the signal. It may take more time to do it properly, but you will be confident in your data and subsequently your analysis.

Data-Based Exercise Prescription

Assessing muscle activation by EMG and inertial monitoring provides additional information as to how the muscle works under different exercise and training conditions. With this type of evaluation, we can check to make sure the muscle is responding as desired throughout the range of motion. This removes common assumptions and generalizations we may rely on to guide our exercise prescription.

Assessing muscle activation by EMG and inertial monitoring helps remove common assumptions and generalizations we may rely on to guide our exercise prescription. Share on X

Although peer-reviewed scientific articles provide excellent information on muscle activation for a wide variety of commonly used training techniques, as we have just seen, there is also an individual response that should be considered, especially when results have not achieved the desired level. Presenting this information in a graphical form is a powerful way to communicate this to both the athlete and the coach to help change established mindsets as to what exercise is “best” and to consider other approaches to the problem.

As you could see from the graphs, our fitness enthusiast would most likely benefit initially from a closer look at his technique to help increase activation and symmetry in the pectoralis muscle, as even different exercises continued to show a similar recruitment pattern. Although investigating additional chest exercises may result in the discovery of a more ideal activation pattern, the fact remains he would most likely benefit from changing his biomechanics to more favorably load the chest muscle among the three tested exercises.

Technique modifications such as a greater range of motion, changes in acceleration, a greater upper arm abduction angle in relation to the torso, and a change in pronation of the hand, combined with a stronger mental connection to the targeted muscle, could all have an effect on the activation pattern of the agonist and synergist muscle groups and presumably his results. The lifter should be retested (combined with video analysis) in the same initial conditions along with detailed notes taken as to what technique changes occurred. The addition of video during a test has been particularly helpful to me in understanding the context of the notes after the fact.

If the goal is more performance oriented, combining EMG data with kinematic data obtained from an inertial monitor during the performance of an actual skill can help ensure specificity of training by matching the prescribed exercises to the actual movement activation patterns. Does the chosen exercise during training actually mimic the activation patterns needed to perform the skill? As we have seen, the results can sometimes be both surprising and enlightening. Effective muscle hypertrophy, strength, or rehabilitation training can be more efficiently matched to the correct exercise for that individual’s muscle activation patterns, thereby narrowing the varied training response.

In my own application of these techniques, changes in acceleration cause noticeable changes in activation level combined with relatively small changes in body position. Trying to establish a stronger mental connection to increase activation seems to be more effective in those who have less training experience than experienced athletes. However, the mental connection becomes more useful in this latter group in helping them deactivate or relax certain muscles involved in the movement to help improve movement efficiency or to emphasize other muscle groups.

As someone who has worked with a wide variety of clients for more than 25 years, it can be difficult to assess all angles and movement patterns at once without possibly overlooking something. Having the data laid out for me in an easy-to-read format makes it easier to address what could be improved and can help unlock unseen issues I may have never even considered that may give an athlete an edge against their competition.

Having the data laid out for me in an easy-to-read format makes it easier to address what could be improved and can help unlock unseen issues I may have never even considered. Share on X

This last point I have encountered many times. There is something very gratifying and humbling when what you thought was occurring wasn’t actually occurring—and, in fact, something else was going on that never even crossed your mind. You really don’t know what you don’t know…until you know you don’t know it. EMG, when done properly and judiciously, can provide that next level of information for clients to help make well-informed decisions for individual exercise prescription.

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

Training around pain and injuries can be vexing, irrespective of the mode or the nature of the injury. The better part of my work over the last five years has explicitly revolved around this premise: How do I get this athlete to achieve tangible progress when X/Y/Z aren’t feasible options? Apart from some combination of reverse-engineering and problem-solving, finding the answer also requires a robust understanding of who the athlete is as a person and what their present limitations consist of.

Another root of this problem is the connotations we’ve created within strength training over the years. For instance, if we want to improve muscular strength, we automatically associate this with bench/squat/deadlift. If we want to improve conditioning, we immediately default to long runs, cycling, or bodyweight circuits. When it comes to power, most of us are under the impression that we must do cleans/jerks/snatches and heavy plyometrics in order to achieve our goals.

What I generally do is see how far from the ‘optimal’ I have to go for an athlete and then assess the return on investment, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

All of these assumptions are short-sighted and patently false. In perfect conditions, of course, we understand what’s optimal, but we have to thoroughly understand the relativity to training. In my opinion, we are too quick to fall into the trappings of conventional biases. A common example of this is improving power for someone if they can’t do cleans or intensive plyos. What I generally do is see how far from the “optimal” I have to go for an athlete and then assess the return on investment. For instance, using a jammer snatch variation for an athlete who’s coming off rotator cuff surgery and isn’t quite ready for a barbell.

Start with the Spectrum

At its fundamental root, power is the summation of force applied during a movement and the velocity at which it moves (P= F*v). The first step in the process is—injury notwithstanding—identifying where the athlete is deficient on the force-velocity curve: Are they slow because they’re weak, or are they weak because they’re slow?

So, for athletes who can’t move a lot of weight but move relatively high loads at high velocities (low force/high speed), I program mostly strength-based applications. I take the opposite approach for athletes who are high force/low speed. And for athletes who are either low or high in both, they’re the easiest—they get a certain dose of each training mode.

Identify the Constraints

Once we observe the athlete for where they are deficient in terms of strength versus speed qualities, we need to thoroughly understand the hard limitations the athlete has, or what can be referred to as individual constraints. Movement constraints can be broadly classified in three ways:

• Physical
• Internal
• External

The physical constraints are the easiest to identify, as these are simply the objective measure of how the injury affects them. In most cases, we can identify these based on the time point of where the athlete is post-injury and what their eligibility is for things like intensity/load/range of motion. The internal constraints are much more difficult to identify, and this really relies more on our ability to communicate and understand our athletes as opposed to the objective analysis of injury.

The internal constraints have much greater variability between athletes, as everyone experiences pain and injury in a very individual manner. However, a caveat to be mindful of here is that internal constraints will not be linear (across time), nor will they be consistent between movements. In other words, the athlete’s perception of pain and ability are multivariant, and throughout the training process a number of things will influence it. The athlete will also have varying levels of confidence based on the tasks at hand, so where confidence may be present in certain areas, it can’t be assumed for others.

Finally, we have external constraints, which are essentially the athlete’s tolerance levels for intensity, ranges of motion, or volume based on their response to training. We can also include environmental items here, such as the type of resistance being used, the surface or position they are working from, or the instruction being delivered by the coach. Where the internal constraints are largely driven by the athlete’s perception, the external constraints are more governed by the coach and represent the factors that we mostly have control or influence over.

Navigating Barriers

In addition to physical and mechanical constraints (i.e., compromised hip extension, inability to load over body weight on single leg squat), we must also recognize the global decrements that have manifested. For barriers, I look at these as either being functional or operational. Put simply, functional barriers speak to getting impaired movement back to a proficient state. Operational barriers, on the other hand, include more secondary aspects such as the rate of movement, load tolerance/capacity, and integrated tasks such as change of direction.

When athletes have difficulty with functional barriers, the solutions are largely predicated on isolating the area in question and working to get back to a balanced state—for example, closing the margin on left/right leg in a Y Balance Test. Navigating functional barriers is not difficult in most cases; it really just requires time and patience. Operational barriers are a bit more involved and tend to require a little more nuance. But broadly speaking, what we’re concentrated on with operational barriers is getting the athlete to demonstrate full kinetic integration without the injured area showing any lag. From there, we want to emphasize the capability of the area and work toward what will be demanded of them in sport/duty.

Virtually any barrier can be overcome—it really just comes down to how much accommodation is needed and how much return the athlete would receive by doing so, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Virtually any barrier can be overcome—it really just comes down to how much accommodation is needed and how much return the athlete would receive by doing so. Engineering extremely complicated and cumbersome strategies for minimal returns is an imprudent and foolish way to go about this. What we’re focused on is efficiency, in which the strategies and applications we present are logical and simple to replicate, and (most importantly) provide a sufficient stimulus for the athlete. This is going to require thorough explanation and objectives from the coach, as the athlete must understand why they are performing certain variations and, more importantly, what these incremental steps are building toward.

Adaptive Power Options

Over the years, I’ve identified a handful of applications or specific pieces of equipment that I commonly rely on for adaptive power options. Bear in mind that there isn’t anything inherently right or wrong with equipment/movement selection, it’s simply a matter of what you can coach proficiently and what the athlete is confident/capable of using or doing. This is a short list of some of the adaptive variations with which I’ve found success. Note that, for some, these were just temporary alternatives to work back to conventional selections; for others, though, these provided long-term or even permanent substitutes. Also, these are introduced in a progressive manner, meaning I would progress an athlete 1-4 chronologically.

1. Band Unloaded

Band unloaded variations can be utilized in a myriad of ways; in this context, however, I’ll use this as an entry-level means for reacclimating the athlete to move under velocity conditions. What this setup does is reduce the athlete’s body mass as they move through a given range of motion (increased band tension = decreased mass).

In turn, this gives the athlete a better opportunity to execute movement with greater speed—and, in most cases, improved confidence. Again, generally speaking, this would be the first installment and would be followed by doing the movements at true body weight, progressing to light loading with speed emphasis and finally to a reflexive/ballistic fashion. I’ve found this to be a highly effective strategy and have used it for an array of movements, but below are what I believe are the best to get familiar with:

Table 1. Band unloaded exercises. Video examples of each exercise can be found on the playlist here.

Video 1. Band-assisted pogo hops.

2. Jammer/Cable (*guided path of motion)

The primary reason for using a cable and/or jammer setup is to provide the athlete with a guided path of motion. If nothing else, I believe this takes away a variable by not having to focus on stabilizing the path of motion, which then results in the athlete being able to concentrate their efforts more purely on “just move fast.”

The primary reason for using a cable and/or jammer setup is to provide the athlete with a guided path of motion, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

The cable and jammer, for the most part, can be viewed as interchangeable, although I know jammer arms aren’t exactly commonplace for most. Just be aware the cable setup will have slightly more demand for the athlete to organize the path of motion, so if you do have access to jammer arms, I would suggest introducing those first, as the athlete can really concentrate on the rate of motion.

Table 2. Jammer/cable exercises. Video examples of each exercise can be found on the playlist here.

3. Landmine Variations

We all know my love for the landmine by now, but I believe it really demonstrates its value with the injured population. With the landmine setup, first and foremost, we give the athlete a better platform to work from, as the unfixed base allows them to utilize the most effective path and ranges of motion given their individual constraints.

The multiplanar nature of the landmine also promotes a high degree of biofeedback, which can help the athlete ‘feel’ their way into optimal movement patterns, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

The multiplanar nature of the landmine also promotes a high degree of biofeedback, which can help the athlete “feel” their way into optimal movement patterns. For adaptive power using the landmine, I’ve particularly found success with the following variations:

Table 3. Landmine-based exercises. Video examples of each exercise can be found on the playlist here.

Video 2. Landmine switch clean.

4. Med ball variations

Med ball variations are a more common accessory option for training power qualities; however, I think some coaches and trainers overlook how beneficial med ball work can be, specifically for the injured population. When I incorporate med ball drills with injured athletes, I mostly do so to promote organic and optimal movement for the athlete. In other words, when performing med ball drills, the athlete will naturally and intuitively find the path of motion that best accommodates them.

When performing med ball drills, the athlete will naturally and intuitively find the path of motion that best accommodates them, says @danmode_vhp. Share on X

Having fewer technical restrictions often bodes well for the athlete. Moreover, med ball work usually gives the athlete an immediate and overwhelming sense of how their body is moving in space. Med ball drills are also typically perceived by the athlete as low-threat movements, which will help them feel more confident executing things under velocity conditions. There are really endless variations I could include here, but for the sake of brevity, here are just a few of the ones I commonly program:

Table 4. Med ball variations. Exercises can be found on the playlist here.

Rate of Progression

I should be clear that everything provided in this article is intended for athletes who have already completed conventional rehab and physical therapy and have been cleared by their physician. The rate at which you move your athletes is predicated on their present ability and long-term goals. I know that sounds open-ended, but it’s really difficult to generalize and say there is some empirical timeline.

That said, I’ll leave you with a few points to consider:

• For some athletes, these are just short-term options until fully healthy; for others, they can be more permanent or long-term solutions. I also utilize everything found in the charts in my accessory blocks.
• Personally, I establish deceleration proficiency before going max effort on acceleration.
• Orthopedic injuries require more strength emphasis.
• Soft tissue injuries (normally) require more speed emphasis.
• However, it’s critically important to load soft tissues heavy and slow before light and fast. Tendons need to be loaded heavy and under eccentric conditions before I move into any true speed work.
• Pay attention to modalities your athletes appear to have the most success with. An example would be seeing greater return on a landmine press than a barbell push press. If something works, stick with it.

Irrespective of injury or sport, be sure to have your athletes demonstrate proficiency in multiple planes of motion under a variety of tempos

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

Most coaches can agree there is value in monitoring your athletes to gain insight into their wellbeing. Whether this is for mitigating injury risk or for performance enhancement, load management via monitoring systems provides useful information for the performance staff. One problem is the cost of many of these systems. There is, however, one method that is cheap and relatively easy to implement: the wellness questionnaire.

The scientific community has established that increases in workload heighten the risk of injury and can decrease performance (Esmaeili et al. 2018)—essentially, the two things we performance coaches are trying to prevent. A study by Fields and colleagues recently provided further evidence that the wellness questionnaire’s measure of readiness at the beginning of the day was directly related to the external workload. The study showed that morning readiness is predicted by the previous day and predictive of that day’s external load measures (Fields et al. 2021).

The scientific community has established that increases in workload heighten the risk of injury and can decrease performance, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

This opens up opportunities for implementing subjective readiness measures to provide the same monitoring benefit as much more expensive tools. Many coaches are now left pondering the key question: “How do I implement this with my team?” Lucky for you, I am here to provide you with the lessons I have learned from using questionnaires with a D1 conference championship-winning team.

Questionnaires are designed to be conversation guides, not decision-makers. The insight gained is just one piece of a larger, more complicated puzzle. Now, this one piece is a key cornerstone, but still just one piece. Conversations must be had among the strength staff, medical staff, and coaching staff both about and with the athletes. The athletes must be involved and talked to when warning signs pop up. The ultimate goal of these questionnaires is to provide guidance on who needs to be talked with, and what about. Effective implementation is feasible when three simple components are established:

1. Using it with the right team.
2. Simple delivery.
3. Insightful analysis.

The Right Team

The right team? What does that even mean?

Questionnaires are not practical for every team. The right group is paramount to the method’s success. A team of 15 and up to 40 athletes is the ideal size. Much smaller and you are better served simply talking to each athlete; and any larger and questionnaire compliance with that many individuals can be very tricky.

The right group is paramount to the method’s success. A team of 15 and up to 40 athletes is the ideal size, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Why not just talk to all your athletes anyway? Why do you need the questionnaires?

Depending on staff size, it can be difficult to have a meaningful conversation in groups of greater than 15 athletes (hence why the questionnaires can help guide you). As an example, when I was working with women’s lacrosse, I would look at the data every morning as it came in live before morning training sessions. I set up Excel’s conditional formatting to highlight any athletes whose responses were outside of the norm. We used a traffic light classification system: between one and two standard deviations below the mean was orange, and beyond two standard deviations created a red light. I would approach the highlighted athletes during the warm-up to talk through the concerns I had. Most ended with “Sounds good, let’s have a great day,” but some of these conversations led to modifications for the training session.

The second part of picking the right team is the culture of that group. The group needs to have a sense of pride in the details and be a group with strong leadership and a desire to improve no matter what it takes. At the end of the day, you are relying on them to take their time to fill out the questionnaire truthfully. Without that, it is pointless—so picking a team that possesses the culture to comply with honesty is key.

Simplicity

The second key piece to address is designing and delivering a questionnaire in an efficient manner that gives you impactful information. Begin with the design of the questionnaire—for those not familiar, one of the more common questionnaire frameworks is multiple questions that are typically on a 1 to 5 scale (Figure 1). These ask about the athlete’s fatigue, sleep quality, soreness, stress, and mood (Fields et al. 2021). Additionally, hours of sleep and RPE have been added along with other more team-specific questions. Two problems can arise with this particular format, detailed below.

The second key piece to address is designing and delivering a questionnaire in an efficient manner that gives you impactful information, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Design Problem 1: Redundant Questions

If multiple questions are very similar, they can be simplified to streamline the information while reducing the time required to fill out the questionnaire to increase compliance. Without any analysis, any coach can agree that fatigue and soreness as well as mood and stress are related. In fact, Fields et al. backed this up by stating that fatigue and soreness were the two most predictive readiness variables for external load measures (2021).

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, fatigue is defined as “the sensation of tiredness,” while soreness is “the sensation of pain or discomfort from exertion.” In the athlete’s mind, what is the difference? We as coaches can specify what we mean it to be, but from an athlete’s point of view, what is one without the other? They are extremely similar and often present simultaneously. Our data provides evidence to support this idea: fatigue and soreness correlated together at 0.59 and had the same scores 55.7% of the time (Table 1).

The same argument can be applied to mood and stress. The difference is much clearer here, but the physiological effect remains similar. Stress and mood correlated at 0.54 and had the same score more often, at 55.9% of the time (Table 1). Our athletes’ changes in mood relative to their averages were more predictive of winning versus losing games compared to change in stress level on gameday. Wellman found evidence of an effect of stress on external load measures, while Fields did not (Wellman et al. 2019) (Fields et al. 2021).

Our athletes’ changes in mood relative to their averages were more predictive of winning versus losing games compared to change in stress level on gameday, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

In conclusion, mood and stress could be used interchangeably in questionnaires, but the overall evidence points to only needing one measurement. Additionally, fatigue correlated moderately with stress and mood; 0.37, and 0.49 respectfully. Mood had a moderate correlation to other factors like soreness at 0.38 (Table 1). Considering the complexity of the human body and our athletes’ lives, these are solid relationships that can be used to provide information about the other measures of readiness.

Design Problem 2: Vague Scales

The second problem is the degree of vagueness in a 1-5 scale, and that lack of definition creates unnecessary discrepancies. This is the same argument that most make with utilizing RPE. You can learn what the extremes feel like: you know what it is like to feel so sore you cannot walk, or what it feels like to wake up feeling so great you could outrun Usain Bolt. Knowing what a 1 or a 5 is on a scale of 1-5 is pretty easy.

What, however, does a 3 feel like?

The degree of vagueness creates “noise” in your question (defined as “irrelevant or meaningless data or output occurring along with desired information” by Merriam-Webster). Creating concrete structure for your question will reduce this unwanted signal of an athlete not truly understanding what one response choice means versus another.

The degree of vagueness creates *noise* in your question, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

Additionally, on a 1 to 5 scale, the middle 3 should be your average to allow room for degrees of positive and negative change. On all the readiness questions, our data averaged out to be a 3.76 out of 5, with a median of 4 across all the questions. Questions about mood and sleep quality actually averaged over 4. This limits our ability as practitioners to understand the positive change in our athlete’s state of being due to the inherent noise created by 4 being the average. Questions should be written so that the average is in the middle, to allow the full range of possible change to be captured by the question’s design.

Optimal Questionnaire Design

What I learned from my experience is that the design needs to be simplified and specifically tuned to amplify the signal of what is impactful, while drowning out the noise of what is not. This can be done with fewer questions than traditional formats (Figure 3). Fewer total questions on the entire questionnaire will decrease the time needed to fill it out, which will increase the focus on the questions that are present.

Fewer total questions on the entire questionnaire will decrease the time needed to fill it out, which will increase the focus on the questions that are present, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

A sleeker design incorporates one question each about fatigue, mood, sleep quality, and the number of hours slept (Figure 3). The questions below were picked based on the statistical analysis mentioned above to decide which questions provide the most information. A very simple response system was employed, with three total responses for the questions on fatigue, mood, and sleep quality. The responses would be below-average, average, and above-average to increase the specificity of the information received by cutting out the vagueness (Figure 3).

Simply, this means that the average will always be the average. I designed this to give room for minor day-to-day differences without creating unnecessary noise when the athletes must define the difference between a 3 and 4. It also plays into the earlier argument that has been brought against RPE—by only giving the choices of average or an extreme, the athlete can easily pick if they are at an extreme or not. This creates clarity.

Questionnaires need to be built to have set “plans of action.” If this happens, then this happens. This can be specific to the team, athlete, or question. For any responses out of the norm, there is a set plan of action to address that issue. I refer to these as “points of discussion.” Again, the concept behind questionnaires is to guide the conversation of how to best manage your athletes. When certain data is received it should initiate a conversation as to why that trend is occurring and guide you toward a solution.

For any responses out of the norm, there is a set plan of action to address that issue, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

This is very context-based and individualized for each team and its members. Points of discussion could be if anybody has a response of significantly below-average score, then they are talked to during warm-up to ascertain more information about what is wrong. This is where the art of coaching is guided by the science of coaching. Some of these circumstances could turn points of discussion into points of decision, meaning that actions were directly taken because of data responses (example plan of action in Figure 4).

Simple Delivery

Once you have designed a practical questionnaire, delivering it is by far the easiest part. These questions can be sent through Google Forms, your athlete management system (AMS), or any other form system. Data can be downloaded into Google Sheets or Excel very easily. Google Forms can be bookmarked, added to the home screen, or saved in many other ways for easy access. Some AMSs can resend the link for the questionnaire at pre-scheduled times to assist with access and compliance.

Once you have designed a practical questionnaire, delivering it is by far the easiest part, says @Torinshanahan42. Share on X

I implemented a Google Form and Excel workflow. Google Forms were sent to the athletes to be bookmarked on their devices. Google Sheets allowed having instant access to a live data feed. I connect the Google Sheet to my Excel workbook for more advanced calculations, analysis, and reporting.

Insightful Analysis

A complete breakdown of how to analyze the data is beyond the scope of this article. Analysis needs to be simple and quick. To be efficient, it should be automated as far as daily analysis goes. Excel and Google Sheets provide starting points to crunch the numbers, set up dashboards, and create great visuals. Excel and Google Sheet wizards like Adam Virgile and Dave McDowell are great resources when it comes to making a workbook. Using a question and response system like the one proposed above will make analysis extremely easy due to the lack of quantifiable responses. This can be challenging for the math nerd in some of us but it makes our lives as coaches easier. We are here to help athletes, not to play around in Excel.

Summary

1. The Right Team

• 15-40 athletes
• A culture that focuses on the details and doing the right thing

2. Streamlined Delivery

• Less than 5 Questions Total
  • Fatigue
  • Mood
  • Sleep Quality
  • Hours of Sleep
• Simple and extremely clear response choices
• Create a plan of action.

3. Analysis

• A million ways to do this.

4. Visualization

• Simple
• Context
• Meaningful and Impactful Information Only

5. Day to Day Operations

• Check responses as data comes in before sessions.
• Engage athletes and staff at points of discussion according to your preset plan of action.

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

Esmaeili, A., Hopkins, W. G., Stewart, A. M., Elias, G. P., Lazarus, B. H., and Aughey, R. J. “The Individual and Combined Effects of Multiple Factors on the Risk of Soft Tissue Non-Contact Injuries in Elite Team Sport Athletes.” Frontiers in Physiology. 2018;9:1280.

Fields, J. B., et al. “Relationship Between External Load and Self-Reported Wellness Measures Across a Men’s Collegiate Soccer Preseason.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021;35(5):1182–1186.

Wellman, A. D., Coad, S. C., Flynn, P. J., Siam, T. K., and McLellan, C. P. “Perceived Wellness Associated with Practice and Competition in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Football Players.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2019;33(1):112–124.

Halson, S. L. “Monitoring Training Load to Understand Fatigue in Athletes.” Sports Medicine. 2014;44(S2):139–147.

Saw, A. E., Main, L. C., and Gastin, P. B. “Monitoring the athlete training response: subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: a systematic review.” British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2015;50(5):281–291.

Taylor, K.-L., Chapman, D. W., Cronin, J., and Gill, N. D. “Fatigue Monitoring in High Performance Sport: A Survey of Current Trends. Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning.” Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning. 2012;20(1):12–23.

Thornton, H. R., Delaney, J. A., Duthie, G. M., and Dascombe, B. J. “Developing Athlete Monitoring Systems in Team Sports: Data Analysis and Visualization.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2019;14(6):698–705.

Wing, C. “Monitoring Athlete Load: Data Collection Methods and Practical Recommendations.” Strength and Conditioning Journal. 2018;40(4):26–39.

Speed is a critical factor in sport performance. Research shows that—wait, this is SimpliFaster, right? Great, then lets skip the small talk about why speed is important. If you’re here, reading this site, you are fully aware of the make-or-break nature of speed in sport success.

Of course, you are also likely aware that developing speed is a somewhat elusive skill. There’s a reason many strength and conditioning coaches are infinitely more comfortable in the weight room than on the field, let alone the track. Perhaps it’s the same reason for the outdated sayings “speed is born” and “speed can’t be trained.”

It seems as though the tide is turning, however, and more and more coaches recognize the importance of directing training toward speed development as opposed to prepping team sports athletes for mock power and Olympic lifting events. Without discrediting the significance and necessity of strength training, speed development should arguably be the cornerstone of training for most positions in most team sports (to preemptively ward off the haters—strength training plays a significant role in speed development, undoubtedly).

Those of us who train youth athletes also juggle the responsibility of long-term athletic development (LTAD). To our understanding, there is no consensus that directs youth training from a broad, multi-year perspective. There are trains of thought that coaches can use to guide programming and program philosophy, but not a clear roadmap. (Side note: that’s part of the fun of coaching, isn’t it?)

What we do know with certainty is this: Kids who don’t show up don’t get better. The #1 factor in the success of any program is adherence. Underlying adherence is attendance.

Here’s the bottom line: If your training is boring, kids won’t show up. Period.

Gamification is a great way to make training sessions something athletes look forward to, encouraging great attendance and program adherence.

Gamification is a great way to make training sessions something athletes look forward to, encouraging great attendance and program adherence, says @CoachBigToe & @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Fun = Attendance. Attendance = Adherence.

What’s going to lead to better sprint development? An 80% effective program with 100% attendance done for six months or a 100% effective program with 80% attendance done for two months? This might oversimplify training the youth athlete but training the youth athlete is a push and pull. If you push with too much technical work (fundamentals) and too little fun trying to make the “perfect” program, they aren’t going to pull. If you take opportunities to work on fundamentals and then meet them in the middle for the real reason they’re there (to have fun), they’ll definitely pull.

This is not to say that good technique is not important. “Putting the fun in fundamentals” requires actually working on the fundamentals…that’s kind of how the saying works. But, believe it or not, the attention spans of youth athletes won’t always be where you want them to be and entire weeks or months of training could go out the window with a big growth spurt.

Additionally, you can’t get to the fundamentals without having the athletes buy in. Giving the athletes some of what they want (fun) will open up the door to everything else (fundamentals) by increasing attendance and engagement.

What Is “Fun”?

Now that we’re on the same page about how putting the fun in fundamentals will increase attendance, we have to know what is in fact fun. Think back to your childhood a long time ago (longer for some than others). Who were your favorite coaches? What made you eager for the next practice as soon as the current one ended? What do you wish you did more of? What types of practices made you fall in love with training? Out of love with training? Which coaches did you wish there were more of? You know more about making training fun than you think…

And here’s a crazy concept: You have your own athletes, and you want to make training fun for them…so ask them what they find fun! Or try multiple drills and ask them which were their favorites. You have an extremely specific focus group (because it is your intended audience), so take advantage of it. And, especially youth athletes, as they won’t mind doing new stuff anyway (they’ll actually enjoy it).

Hidden Benefits of Gamifying Training

In addition to increased adherence—and the instrumental impact that alone has on long-term development—gamification brings other benefits as well.

1. Improved Effort

Improved effort is one such benefit of gamification. Anecdotally, Kyle has had kids who were holding back when it wasn’t time to hold back. He once told an athlete that if she hit a PR for the day on resisted sprint power (measured with the 1080 Sprint), he’d participate in her next Tik Tok video. She didn’t just hit an in-session PR, she hit an all-time PR. Her sprint power was ~20% higher on that rep than her others that day.

Not only did Kyle learn a Tik Tok dance that day, but he got from that athlete the most she had ever given.

Although this was arguably more of a challenge than a game, the outcome is the same: exciting the athlete and providing motivation to increase performance above the day’s baseline psychological readiness.

2. Engage the Kid Who Doesn’t Want to Be There

If you’ve trained youth athletes long enough, you’re bound to have come across kids who just don’t want to be there. Some will even outwardly admit the only reason they come to training is because their parents make them.

As you can imagine, this group is very difficult to train. It’s draining mentally and emotionally, and the outcomes aren’t great because the kids’ efforts and desires to improve aren’t great.

We’ve found games to be particularly helpful in engaging this crowd. If you can turn training into fun, all of a sudden exertion and attitude both move in the right direction. And if you find a game the athlete really enjoys, you’ve just struck gold. Manipulating the rules/constraints of the game to make it more challenging is your golden ticket to achieving the desired training stimulus. For instance, if part of the training session includes 20-meter sprints, change the game so the athlete only has a shot at winning if they give 100% effort over 20 meters. Bingo.

If you can turn training into fun, all of a sudden exertion and attitude both move in the right direction. And if you find a game the athlete really enjoys, you’ve just struck gold. Share on X

If you get enough smiles over the course of enough sessions, maybe—just maybe—that kid will even start wanting to be there.

3. Generate Referrals

You tell me which is more likely to entice your client’s buddies to want to come to your facility:

Training is cool. I got faster. Yea.

Or…

Training is awesome. My coach’s name is Big Toe, can you believe that? It’s even on his license plate. He’s like, some kind of sport science nerd, or something. Half the time we do games, like races and obstacle courses. I’m getting faster, too. It’s fun there.

Kids aren’t going to talk about your facility because their flying 10 time dropped a tenth of second. They don’t know what a flying 10 is, and the metrics don’t mean anything to them.

The same goes for parents. Unless they are “in the biz” and can recognize good training from poor training, they won’t care about the metrics we care about.

You know what kids will tell their friends about? How much fun they have. Same goes for parents—if they feel that you’re responsible, you’re a good influence, AND their kids have fun, that’s the kind of thing they’ll gladly share with other parents.

Long story short: The use of games can impact your bottom line.

Creating  Games

Here are two lessons we’ve learned from coaching sprint training for youth athletes:

1. Everyone runs a little faster when they’re being chased.
2. No one likes losing.

The facilities we work at have much different layouts from each other. TCBoost, where Matt works, has a ton of open space. The RE_Building, where Kyle works, has a 60-meter, two-lane track. Matt’s facility is square-like, Kyle’s is a narrow rectangle.

You can probably relate to one of us. We bet you either work in a small, narrow space, like Kyle, or a wide open one, like Matt.

Either way, we’ve got you covered. Below are some of our favorite games to excite athletes, elicit competition, and provoke performance.

*P.S. Notice the athlete’s body language and facial expressions before, during, and after these activities.

Resisted Sprint Races

Video 1. Resisted sprint races.

This is a simple, yet fun one. One athlete does a resisted sprint on the first “go” call. When they reach a distance of your choice, you give a second “go” call. It’s a race to the finish line. At Kyle’s facility, he typically sets up 15-meter sprints and gives the second “go” call around the 7-meter line, but you’ll want to tailor the timing to make it a competitive race.

If you want athletes to PR in sprint power, give this game a go. Between not wanting to lose a race and hearing those footsteps coming behind them, this game tends to improve resisted sprint performance.

Chase Games

Everyone runs just a little faster when being chased. Knowing there’s something behind you coming for you that you can’t see is quite the motivator.

Everyone runs just a little faster when being chased. Knowing there’s something behind you coming for you that you can’t see is quite the motivator, says @CoachBigToe & @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Plus, chasing each other is a great way to get a quiet kid to come out of their shell. We’ve had athletes go from seemingly introverted to trash talking within minutes of competing in this game!

There are a variety of ways to create advantages or disadvantages for offense or defense by manipulating spacing, starting position, or initiation to develop the intended skill for that session.

Video 2. Chase games.

Athletes face each other and begin about 1 meter apart. There is a cone 10 or 15 meters down the track. The game begins when the athlete nearest the cone moves. Their goal is to get to the cone before being tagged. If that happens, they win the race. If the athlete gets tagged, that’s a loss.

In this next version, both athletes start lying down, with defense (in front) having their toes on the line and offense (in back) with their eyes on the line. After the coach says ready, offense can get up whenever they want and race to the finish line. Defense must react to the offense and try to beat them. (Yes, this was outside. Thanks, COVID-19.)

Video 3. Fox and hound.

Another option for chase games is to add implements like pool noodles. In the video below, the athletes were working on curve running by chasing each other through a figure 8. The coach determines how far ahead the offense starts and where the finish line is, then says “go.” Let the show begin! In this variation, instead of tagging each other with their hand, they have to whack tag each other with the noodle, instead.

Insert Video 4. Noodle chase.

COD vs. Linear Sprint

You got a better name for it? We’re all ears.

As with the other games, you’ll probably have to play with the spacing to fit your athletes and make the race competitive.

Video 5. COD vs. Linear Sprint.

This is basically a modified 5-0-5 versus a 15- or 20-meter sprint. One athlete runs forward toward a line, turns 180 degrees, and runs back to where they started. The other athlete sprints straight ahead. It’s a race to the finish line.

Kyle typically starts by having the athlete who is changing directions start at the finish line, run 5 meters forward, then turn and run back through the finish line. The other athlete is 15 meters away and gets to run straight.

Cone Stacking

Kyle stole this drill from Lee Taft (or, at the very least, Lee inspired it).

Video 6. Cone Stacking

Put cones 5, 10, and 15 meters away from the start line. Athletes grab the first cone, bring it back to the start line, then grab the second, stack it on top of the first, and repeat for the final cone.

Cone Tic-Tac-Toe

Kyle definitely stole this from another coach. Probably Lee Taft, again, though maybe not. Someone else could deserve to get credit for this.

Video 7. Cone Tic-Tac-Toe

I made a makeshift tic-tac-toe board out of bands. Put cones as far away as you like. Each athlete gets four cones of the same color, then add one cone of a third color. Once an athlete uses all four of their color, it’s first come, first served for the final cone. Alternatively, you can just put five cones for each athlete and let it play out.

Noodle Tag

Okay, this isn’t exactly a raw speed developer, but it is a fun and appropriate game for developing overall athleticism in youth athletes. The variations are endless, but the premise is simple: offense, defense, offense tags with the noodle, defense tries not to get tagged. One-on-one tag works really well in smaller groups, and creating teams works well with bigger groups.

Video 8. Wall Tag.

For smaller groups, video 8 shows what Matt calls “wall tag” (creative, right?). Again, probably credited to Lee Taft. Offense has to get their foot across the line at either one of the openings between the cones on the left or right side. Defense can reach over the wall to tag but not cross it—but they can run around the wall.

For larger groups, video 9 shows what Matt calls “team tag” (creativity is his strong suit). Offense starts in the middle box and goes one at a time, trying to tag one defender and run back. Defense must stay inside the boundaries but leave the boundaries once they are tagged. The clock starts on the “go” command and stops when the last offensive athlete returns to the middle box after tagging a defender. Communication, teamwork, agility, fun.

Video 9. Team Tag.
Cone Pick-Up Races

One of the benefits of racing is that it’s very objective: You either crossed the finish line first or you did not. One of the challenges of change-of-direction training is a 180-degree cut actually being 180 degrees going full speed or doing it precisely while going fast enough to provide an effective stimulus. Cone pick-up races combat this challenge and play into the objectivity of racing.

Determine the skill you want to work on, set up the cones/constraints accordingly, and explain the very simple rules. In this example, the skill was curve running combined with bilateral cutting. Here were the instructions: Start behind the line, stay on the outside of the cones, run and grab the cone in the middle, run back, and don’t lose.

Video 10. Cone Pick Up.

However, it doesn’t have to just be cones. The point is that it’s objective if the athlete picked up the item or not. In video 11, we were working on our pro shuttles (5-10-5) and using tennis balls, which took away the guesswork if the athlete touched the line or not. It reinforced the technique of what we were specifically training for and prevented the cheating of not touching the line to try to be faster. Matt also threw in a reactive start to create an advantage/disadvantage for “offense” and “defense,” respectively.

Insert Video 11. Tennis Ball Pick-Up.

Curve running, 90-degree cuts, 180-degree cuts, pivots cuts, accelerating from any position—you can emphasize anything depending on how you design the drill. Although some technique may worsen slightly with the intensity of the race, we believe it’s incredibly valuable to give the athletes simple constraints and have them figure it out full speed. If they go into a cut too fast and lose balance, they’ll lose; if they round the cut and make a wide turn, they’ll lose; if they try to be too fancy picking up the cone and drop it, they’ll lose.

Although some technique may worsen slightly with the intensity of the race, we believe it’s incredibly valuable to give the athletes simple constraints and have them figure it out full speed. Share on X

Additionally, the purpose of change-of-direction training is to improve game-speed agility during sport, and cone pick-up races do an awesome job bridging that gap.

Relay Races

Relay races are an awesome option for larger groups with endless variations. You’re competing against the other teams but also competing for your teammates. Although this video is not inside TC Boost (thanks again COVID-19), below is a video of short accelerations into a curve run followed by a sprint finish.

Video 12. Relay Race.

The athletes were cheering on their teammates, running as fast as possible, not thinking specifically about their footwork, and having fun. Checking off a lot of boxes right there.

A final relay for you…no, literally—a relay for you. Your athletes versus you, to be specific.

Twenty meters down, touch the line, 20 meters back. When the athlete returns to the start line, they tag their teammate, who promptly takes off with a smile that says, “I want to beat you, Coach.” Meanwhile, you have to touch the line and turn around again. You run one lap for every athlete you have.

Our advice…bust this one out in small groups, and only with young athletes!

Insert Video 13. Relay vs. Coach.

Speed Gate Golf

Kyle learned this game from Sam Portland—he talks about it in episode 141 of Joel Smith’s Just Fly Performance Podcast.

The idea here is to give an athlete a specific submaximal time to hit over a flying 10. You can play with what percentage of the PR you want them to hit. Not very many athletes get excited about intentionally running slow, but this is one way to challenge and engage them to do so.

We don’t have research to cite here, but it seems like if an athlete has conscious control and understanding of what 85%, 90%, and 95% of top speed feels like, and can execute those speeds on demand, that gives the athlete greater command over their speed and likely pushes the max velocity ceiling up.

At the very least, it can build mental comfort with running fast, as opposed to grinding and muscling your way to speed.

Variations: Changing the Start Command

To break the monotony of saying “go” to start each rep, an option is to engage athletes with different types of games. For instance, give simple math problems—if the answer is odd, they go. Or call out words and when the word ends in a vowel, that’s when the race starts.

To break the monotony of saying ‘go’ to start each rep, engage athletes with different types of games. For instance, give simple math problems—if the answer is odd, they go. Share on X

You’ll sometimes see brains melt.

Insert Video 14. Word games.

Get creative—maybe you have a deck of cards, and the race starts when you flip a face card, or an odd number, or an even number. Or a heart, a spade, an odd heart…the possibilities are endless.

Rock-paper-scissors is also a fan favorite around. Play until one athlete wins, and that’s when the race starts. Or have them face each other and pre-designate, “If you win, it’s a race to the cone on the left, but if you win, it’s a race to the cone on the right.”

Insert Video 15. Rock-Paper-Scissor Race.

If you find yourself, or your athletes, getting bored with traditional starts, mix it up with some of these games or create your own.

What About the Actual Fundamentals?

Technique is important, but it’s not the be-all and end-all. It should be addressed, but it doesn’t have to be perfect. Well, it depends. Every coach’s favorite saying. Please hold your eye roll for after this section.

We all know the fundamentals of good sprinting technique: good posture, hit your A-position, strike the ground with the ball of the foot, etc. And we all know what contributes to good sprinting technique: having enough strength and power to put appropriate force in the ground, the coordination to move the limbs in the right positions, the strength to hold/maintain those positions, and a nervous system effective enough to do all of that very fast.

With youth athletes, most of their “gainz” will come from improved coordination and nervous system capabilities. They don’t have the prerequisite physiology (yet) to achieve meaningful morphological changes. So, in the meantime, while waiting for Mother Nature to do her thing, exposing your athletes to the correct sprinting positions so they know what they are and what they feel like, sprinting with max intent, and having a ton of fun sounds like a good alternative.

On the flip side, your athletes will not have perfect technique in games. They will have every other variable under the sun distracting them from thinking “knee up, toe up” every step. The intensity of the game, trying to navigate defenders, strategizing what to do on offense, locating the ball, etc. will all take priority.

Gamifying sprint training is an opportunity to bridge the gap between technique work and game-speed performance, says @CoachBigToe & @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

In training, an effective formula for helping “form” stick is pairing technique work with gamified drills. Also, we can’t forget the added bonus of additionally receiving coaching and feedback during these drills. This formula, over time, will lead to the transfer of technique in training to technique on the field.

Gamifying sprint training is an opportunity to bridge the gap between technique work and game-speed performance. Perfect technique isn’t useful if it can’t be applied with any sort of “winning” on the line (sport) and adding speed to awful technique will not contribute to LTAD (both performance and staying healthy). Athletes need the fundamentals, but they also need fun to put everything together.

To Gamify or Not to Gamify?

Let’s face it: Puberty is the greatest performance enhancer a kid will ever have. Youth athletes are going to get bigger, faster, and stronger all on their own, thanks to Mother Nature. So, don’t get in their way!

In our opinion, the biggest goal of training the youth athlete is instilling the most important training habit of all: consistency. Make training fun so your kids want to come to training sessions.

The biggest goal of training the youth athlete is instilling the most important training habit of all: consistency, says @CoachBigToe & @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

The results you deliver, your pocketbook, and the athlete’s long-term development will all benefit from this approach.

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

Matt Tometz is a sports performance specialist/sport science coordinator at TCBoost Sports Performance in Northbrook, Illinois. With a speed development background and a fascination for data, it’s his daily challenge to combine the art of coaching with the science of data for his athletes of all ages and sports. Outside the facility, Matt creates educational content for coaches and professionals. Find him on Instagram and Twitter @CoachBigToe, his website www.MattTometz.com, his YouTube channel and LinkedIn “Matt Tometz,” and his email: [email protected].

Read this; watch that; have you listened to Coach X?

Sound familiar?

Coaches today have an unimaginable amount of information at their fingertips compared to the coaches of 20 years ago. But is this a good thing? Trick question: of course it’s a good thing! The only downside is that within all this information, many coaches are trying to separate themselves from the pack and are drifting into dogmatic, almost militaristic styles of thinking on how to approach sports performance.

I’m not here to call these coaches out—plenty of others have—but rather I am here to say let us learn from them and their approaches. Behind most approaches (except burpees, which are stupid, and I will die on this hill fighting against them), there is a bit of truth.

There is a dichotomy between how professionals in strength and conditioning think the field must be handled.

A dichotomy is simply a division or contrast between two things that are (or are represented as being) divided into two entirely different, opposed, or contradictory groups (Dictionary.com). To put it in weight room terms: bilateral vs unilateral, aerobic vs anaerobic. Navigating dichotomies is recognizing the benefits of both yin and yang while refusing to make camp in one or the other. If you go too far one way or another, you might find success, but whatever success you do find will be short lived.

Navigating dichotomies is recognizing the benefits of both yin and yang while refusing to make camp in one or the other, says @Tate_Tobiason. Share on X

By learning to identify the dichotomies present in our field, we as coaches can better navigate not only our athletes’ development, but the forward direction of our chosen field.

The Dichotomy of Science

Science has been one of the most abused and misused words in the past decade. Coaches and companies everywhere claim to be driven by the science, and while that is good and all, the science can only go so far. There is a dichotomy between scientific theory and practice, which coaches must navigate.

Staying up to date on the latest research and understanding the implications is important, but I believe it is even more important to understand what the research is not stating. What’s the size and scope of the study? What are the rest times? (I’m looking at you P.A.P.) Can they fit into the flow of our training session? What population was studied?

Remember, the scientific method can only address one specific issue at a time, while sports are crazy complex. The science is only good if we can use it to win more games, not just to brag about our scientific approach on social media. Treat the science as a compass which guides us in the right direction while adapting the findings to our current situation. Do not treat the science as a rigid map and overhaul the facilities after each new study.

Remember, the scientific method can only address one specific issue at a time, while sports are crazy complex, says @Tate_Tobiason. Share on X

And remember, your athletes are not data points to be manipulated—they are individuals and should be treated as such. Do not turn into a callous lab coat in your quest to be backed by the science. The perfect program only exists between citations.

The Dichotomy of Technology

Technology has undoubtedly improved sport performance. From instantaneous feedback to player profiling, it helps guide a coach beyond what they can see with their own two eyes. However, if we aren’t careful, technology can take up our entire line of vision. The dichotomy between technology and old school observation occurs when a coach spends more time watching the numbers on a screen than they do the athlete.

A poor velocity reading might occur due to an imbalance in foot pressure or bar path, but one won’t know that if their eyes are glued to a screen. Focus on the athlete first and foremost before examining the data. Be a coach! There is such a thing as a recall function. Over time, your coach’s eye will start to align with the readings to help you become a more efficient coach. But be careful not to reject technology all together and essentially fly blind. Sorry, but no one has strength sonar.

The Dichotomy of Mobility

What is a sport coach’s favorite saying after losing a game? You guessed it: we need to stretch more. I’m going to blame us strength coaches for allowing this phrase to even still exist. Stretching is not a cure-all, and sometimes rigid movement on the field is because of overthinking.

We need to do a better job educating sport coaches on what mobility and flexibility are, and the dichotomy between training them. On the one hand, rigidity is necessary for maximal force production; on the other hand, however, force production must be expressed throughout a range of motion in sport. Careful how far you swing to one side or another. Mobilize for the sporting needs and no more.

Mobilize for the sporting needs and no more, says @Tate_Tobiason. Share on X

The Dichotomy of Strength

Do not get me wrong—strength matters. Strength, however, is not the end-all-be-all in sport performance. Strength lays the foundation for what can be, providing the athlete with potential to succeed.

The dichotomy between strength training and sport training appears when an athlete—in order to continue to increase strength levels—must reallocate training time towards raising said strength levels. At some point, the strength must be manifested through power outputs, RFD, and of course, on field/court performance. Where on the flip side, an athlete that does no strength training opens themselves towards higher injury rates and decreased performance as Father Time ticks away.

The Dichotomy of the Coach–Athlete Relationship

This is a unique dichotomy. On the one hand we want to develop meaningful relationships with our athletes where they feel comfortable enough to be honest with us; on the other hand however, we must maintain a respectable role as mentor/coach.

A coach does not need to know every athlete’s back story, they simply need to acknowledge that the athlete is a unique individual. Learn the art of short conversations. Mingle with the group before sessions and identify relatable characteristics between you and the athletes. Careful about how far your discussions dive with an athlete. These can be meaningful and warranted, but have potential to drift into legally gray issues. Do your job, be their coach—they already have friends.

Do your job, be their coach—your athletes already have friends, says @Tate_Tobiason. Share on X

The Dichotomy of the Strength Coach–Sport Coach Relationship

Every coach believes their way is the correct way. Sport coaches want to tell strength coaches how to lift, and strength coaches want to tell sport coaches how to practice. As strength coaches, we must develop healthy relationships with our sport coaches. We must avoid getting pushed around and overrun by the sport coaches wishes, while also being willing to compromise on training views at times. How many coaches have been fired or left on bad terms due to their dictatorial stances on programming? Then how many coaches have been fired because they didn’t speak up and the team fell apart?

By learning to walk this dichotomy, the field of strength and conditioning was created. Boyd Epley was no sport scientist. Rather, he was a man who knew how to sell his program to the coaching staff(s) while working with what they provided him. And he made the most of it, giving the likes of the author and the reader a chance to make a living.

It takes a village to find success in sport. Do not ostracize yourself from that village.

It takes a village to find success in sport. Do not ostracize yourself from that village, says @Tate_Tobiason. Share on X

Yes, There Are More

Strength and conditioning is a unique field where research and technology meet the human condition, opening up a world of nuance along with an ocean of dichotomies to navigate. I have only touched on a few of the many—take some time this week to examine your own coaching/practice and identify the possible dichotomies present. Feel free to share your reflections with me. I’d love to hear what you come up with.

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

In 2011, I was coaching at a high school spring invitational in New York State that required athletes to advance through three rounds of the 200m to make the six-man final in one day. We had four athletes capable of making the final, so I gave them specific instructions for the first two rounds to advance while conserving energy.

• Round 1: Sprint the turn and “float” the straight.
• Round 2: Sprint the first 80 meters, “float” through the exchange zone, push for 50 meters, and “float” through the finish line.
• Round 3 (finals): Race.

In rounds 1 and 2, I noticed their best limb velocity was in the portion of the race in which they were coached to “float.” Looking back, I wish I gave them a more direct plan to execute in the finals rather than to just “race.” Why? Their final performance was strained and stiff, lacking the limb velocity seen in trials and semis.

I was previously aware of the power of relaxation during a full-speed sprint or competitive race, but this visual experience proved to me that relaxation while sprinting needs to be consistently coached and executed by the athletes in practice for optimal performance.

This visual experience proved to me that relaxation while sprinting needs to be consistently coached and executed by the athletes in practice for optimal performance, says @AthWestchester. Share on X

Fast forward to today: Lessons learned. Two high school athletes (400m and 400 hurdler), both with excellent strength and power, came across my training group, Athletics Westchester. Each developed excellent 10-meter fly times, but as we extended their fly to 30 meters and beyond, they would begin to strain and lose the limb velocity shown over 10 meters. The solution? Floats.

What Is the “Float”?

At Athletics Westchester, we define “floating” as sprint segments of 90-93% speed for a determined distance while focusing on relaxation. These segments can be as short as 10 meters and as long as 50 meters during practice sessions. To arrive at the float, we usually accelerate (step on the gas) for a distance of 20-30 meters to build quality momentum before floating (cruise control).

Video 1. Thirty-meter sprint/20-meter float: After the acceleration, the 20-meter float allows the athlete to practice in rhythmic sprinting and emphasize quality mechanics.

In order for athletes to truly know and feel the float, it is important to time them for immediate feedback. One athlete’s internal 93% might turn out to be 88%, while another athlete’s internal 93% could turn out to be 97%. Consistency of the float helps to provide athletes with a true sense of the necessary effort combined with relaxation to hit the target percentages during workouts. We use Freelap to measure and video analysis to coach this critical skill.

Consistency of the float helps to provide athletes with a true sense of the necessary effort combined with relaxation to hit the target percentages during workouts, says @AthWestchester. Share on X

Although the distance, intensity, number of reps, and rest are important (I will discuss them later), the coaching points of relaxation while moving fast are perhaps the most important place to begin. In other words, if your athletes are not being coached/reminded how to relax, you will become the coach that “barks RELAX at their athletes, which did little more than tie them up like an iron deer on the front lawn.” (Bud Winter, So You Want to Be a Sprinter)

Coaching Relaxation

First, as coaches, we have to identify areas of the body to target, whether or not relaxation exists, and provide feedback/instruction on how to improve it when we see strain. Below is our checklist:

1. Jaw: loose = relaxed, while clenched = strain

• Some important cues/strategies that have worked for our athletes to keep their jaw loose:
• “Sprint with space between your teeth.” (Maintain space between your upper and lower molars.)
• “Sprint while gently placing your tongue on the roof of your mouth.” (This helps prevent teeth from touching.)
• When practicing floats in a team setting, encourage your athletes to “talk to each other” while running fast (think Bolt).

2. Neck

• A relaxed jaw leads to a relaxed neck. If you see strain in the neck in some of your athletes, use the strategies for a relaxed jaw (1) or shoulders (3).

3. Shoulders: low = relaxed, while high = strain

• Some important cues/strategies that have worked for our athletes to keep their shoulders low:
• “Hands travel below your waist on the downward stroke of each arm action.”
• “Emphasize the downward action of the arms and let the swing forward happen naturally.”

4. Forearms: loose = relaxed, while flexed = strain

• Some important cues/strategies that have worked for our athletes to keep their forearms loose:
• “Maintain space between your fingers and palm.”
• “Lightly maintain contact with your index finger, middle finger, and thumb.”

Once you have established an expectation with your athletes that relaxation is highly valued and will be coached, it is time to incorporate “floating sprints” into your practice.

Video 2. This slow-motion capture of a floating sprint shows relaxation of the jaws, neck, and shoulders.

An Emphasis on Floating Sprints

Back to the athletes mentioned earlier. The 400m runner established a baseline indoor performance in October 2020 at the Armory Trials with a 51.18, while his February 2021 indoor performance was 48.93 at the Adidas Indoor Nationals. On May 8, 2021, he opened his outdoor season with a 48.40 at the Loucks Games.

The 400 hurdler last ran the event in June 2019, running 55.93. On May 8, 2021, he opened his outdoor season with a 54.26 at the Loucks Games. Both emphasized “floating sprints” during their training and eventually improved their float to a speed equal to their previous best time in the fly. Below are some sample workouts used by both athletes that placed a major emphasis on floating.

1. 20-meter acceleration followed by a 30-meter float (90-93%); 5-6 reps with 4- to 6-minutes’ rest.
2. 30-meter acceleration followed by a 20-meter float (90-93%); 5-6 reps with 4- to 6-minutes’ rest.
3. 30-meter acceleration followed by a 50-meter float (90-93%), last 30 meter over wickets; 3-4 reps with 6- to 8-minutes’ rest b/t.
4. 50-meter acceleration followed by a 50-meter float (90-93%); 4-5 reps with 6-8 minutes’ rest.
5. 50-meter acceleration followed by a 50-meter float (90-93%) followed by a 50-meter fly; 3-4 reps with 8- to 10-minutes’ rest.

**On occasion, in late April/early May, the 400 hurdler would race model to H1, H2, or H3 and continue to float for 20-30 meters after touchdown.**

How did these athletes know if they were floating fast enough? We used their best 30-meter fly time and took 90-93% of that.

For example, with a best 30-meter fly of 3.00:

• 90% = 3.33
• 93% = 3.26

20-meter float target range was 2.17-2.22.

30-meter float target range was 3.26-3.33.

50-meter float target range was 5.43-5.55.

These ranges allowed each athlete to run FAST AND RELAXED, so they could emphasize high-quality sprinting mechanics over a longer period of time. Floats also allowed them to slightly increase their volume versus a maximum-effort fly. The additional reps increased their work capacity and limited unnecessary practice injuries.

Video 3. In this 30-meter sprint/20-meter float/20-meter fly, we can see the athlete relaxed during the float with relaxed jaws, neck, and shoulders. In the fly portion, however, we can see the athlete begin to strain as he feels he needs to “try harder” to move faster. Recording, acknowledging, and applying strategies to move fast in a relaxed state can help reduce this tension so the fly is as relaxed as the float.

Final Thoughts

As floats are emphasized in a training program, your athletes will begin to see their “float” time decrease. This means that their 90-93% speed is improving. It is a major confidence boost when times that used to require “max effort” are now achieved with a slightly “submaximal effort” in practice. From my experience, when the “float” speed improves, and you know through your coach’s eye and/or video that they are truly floating, personal bests in competition are coming soon.

From my experience, when the ‘float’ speed improves, and you know through your coach’s eye and/or video that they are truly floating, personal bests in competition are coming soon. Share on X

With this knowledge, understanding, and experience of floating, the athletes you coach can develop a good feeling of exactly how fast and far they can run the “floating” segments of the 200m, 400m, and 400 hurdles as well as the relaxation necessary to achieve the necessary limb velocity for the 100m.

What happens to the extra 7-10% that might be missing from practice by emphasizing floats instead of maximum effort sprints? The 7-10% missing in practice is reserved for the meets! By practicing in a SLIGHTLY lower gear in practice, you allow your athletes to develop some “reserve speed” that comes out in the most highly competitive environments…which is what ultimately matters the most.

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

Every traditional Olympic weightlifting program looks inherently the same on paper. There is a combination or variation of snatch, clean, jerk, squat, push, pull, and common accessories; then rinse, wash, repeat. Intensities and volume prescriptions are based on the athlete’s competition schedule and how many weeks out they are from a meet.

This ideology of programming has worked for decades, and the beauty in this simplicity is that an athlete can train as long as they have a barbell and set of plates. But just as there is more to a basketball player than being able to dribble and shoot, a weightlifter needs more than just the snatch and clean.

In weightlifting, you have to play the long game. The only way to become more proficient in the lifts is through time and consistency. You have to be able to physically endure the high intensities and volumes to get stronger while still improving on the technical aspects of the lifts. If an athlete can’t endure the rigorous training density of a cycle, then frustration and lack of progress begin to set in. By providing the athlete with a better base to build from, we can avoid such stagnation—the whole is always stronger than one part.

GPP for Competitive Weightlifters

General physical preparation (GPP) gives an athlete the opportunity to step away from the barbell without crippling their training or suspending their overall goals. We can look at GPP as a phase in a program or as the accessory movements built into a more traditional weightlifting program. In either case, the overall themes of GPP are variability and durability.

We can look at GPP as a phase in a program or as the accessory movements built into a more traditional weightlifting program. Either way, the overall themes of GPP are variability and durability. Share on X

As a benefit, GPP supports athletes on a wide spectrum, from rehabbing injuries to developing a more athletic base. Training with alternative pieces of equipment forces the athlete to move differently, thus exposing some underlying weaknesses. Equipment variety (dumbbells, kettlebells, bands, medicine balls, etc.) can easily alter body position, load placement, and movement. This will keep training efficiency high and decrease the likeliness of plateauing due to years of adaptation.

Weightlifters are regimented in their training and are more likely to take time off due to chronic injury and overload—GPP can provide a solution to help heal a nagging injury or improve the athlete’s ability to withstand overall training density better through several cycles. The biggest benefits to GPP exercises, specifically those without a barbell, are to:

• Challenge the athlete in non-sport-specific movements and positions.
• Increase longevity and sustainability within the sport.
• Improve motor control and neuromuscular adaptations.

Non-Sport-Specific Movements

Weightlifting is predominantly a bilateral (with the exception of the split jerk) and sagittal plane sport. So, this is where the athlete is the strongest. These strengths often hide other deficiencies. Training unilateral movements will highlight weaker areas and provide the coach with more information on how to improve their athlete’s training and performance. This training will also help an athlete reduce the bilateral deficit effect, because training unilaterally will improve overall bilateral strength and power.

A common issue we see in weightlifting is an athlete not pushing evenly through both feet. We all know that every human has a stronger side and a weaker side, and when an athlete isn’t conscious of those asymmetries, it can lead to issues down the road. Broadly speaking, it can either lead to muscular compensation or create a technical flaw. GPP gives coaches an opportunity to include more unilateral work to help close any asymmetries between the right and left sides without affecting the overall goal of the training day.

GPP gives coaches an opportunity to include more unilateral work to help close any asymmetries between the right and left sides without affecting the overall goal of the training day. Share on X

The same is true for stepping out of the “sagittal box” and into more frontal and transverse movements. The human body is three-dimensional, so training solely in flexion and extension for the sake of the sport limits the athlete’s robustness and adaptability should something be thrown off during a lift.

Think about when you play Jenga: as you pull one block and place it on top of another, you make a crisscross pattern because that builds a stronger foundation. If you were to only stack the blocks in one direction, the game would never get far because the column wouldn’t have any true support from outside forces. The human body is no different. Our soft tissue structures are interwoven and all connected. If we aren’t training those cross sections to be durable, then we are limiting our athletes in their ability to grow and progress within the sport.

The KB SL Crossover Row is one of my favorite movements because it combines two common weightlifting accessories: the row and the RDL. Weightlifters need a strong back and posterior chain, and this movement checks all the boxes because the single leg crossover row takes it a step further with glute strength and stability on the stance leg and lat/upper back engagement on the opposite side (which, coincidentally, strengthens the posterior fascial sling).

Cue the athlete to “coil” around the hip of the stance leg to ensure they aren’t dumping their shoulder forward as the kettlebell reaches toward the ground. The spine and hips stay neutral, which also improves IR hip stability of the standing leg. Look to create variations from more traditional accessories, which will challenge an athlete and bring efficiency to the program.

Load Variation

Variability in training will also help avoid overuse and chronic injuries that creep in due to fatigue or the inability to tolerate programming. We see it all too often when an athlete has to take time off due to a chronic injury. They begin a cycle of PT and rehabilitation, and not only do they physically atrophy by not loading their body, but mentally their confidence and investment in training deteriorate because they feel like they are falling farther and farther behind. When a weightlifter’s sole purpose is to move more weight, being sidelined and relegated to band work and bodyweight movement is arguably more dangerous mentally than it is physically.

But what if it doesn’t have to be that way?

GPP can be utilized to stay ahead of these overuse injuries. Through strategic programming, the athlete can focus on building strength and technical proficiency.

Exercises often used in traditional rehab can be performed under load and viewed as prehab instead. Other exercises can give certain joints and musculature a break without completely eradicating an athlete’s training cycle. Load variation can either protect an athlete from incurring an overuse injury or allow them to continue training through an injury. In either case, we avoid a total sidelining of the athlete for an extended period of time.

The belt squat is a great way to load an athlete’s hips and quads without adding any additional compressive load or volume on the spine, says @nicc__marie. Share on X

One common ailment among weightlifters is low back pain. This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone due to the nature of the sport’s training intensity and the amount of pulling scripted in their program. The belt squat is a great way to load an athlete’s hips and quads without adding any additional compressive load or volume on the spine. The athlete can continue to squat heavy-ish and often without aggravating or straining the spine any more than it needs to be.

Video 1. Athletes can use belt squats as a substitute for back squats if training through an injury or as an accessory on days that back squats and front squats aren’t programmed. The belt squat also allows the hips to work through a deeper range of motion.

Mobilizing and strengthening that deep hip flexion shown in the above clip will prepare the athlete to better handle the dynamic load of the barbell when dropping into the bottom position of the clean or snatch.

Motor Control

An athlete should understand why GPP exercises are essential to their training. This autonomy creates buy-in and keeps them engaged. The Olympic lifts require a lot of mental focus, so when it comes time for accessory work, athletes often mentally disengage. But we never want our athletes to “go through the motions.” There should be intention and cueing behind each exercise. Having the benefit of understanding why they are doing something will produce better results.

Neurologically speaking, mental engagement or “intention” isn’t the only way the brain is involved. Two less obvious skills that are critical to a successful lift are proprioception and spatial awareness. Band loading is a simple yet effective way to challenge motor control and stability in major joints. We can utilize tempo and speed work, incorporate positional holds, and add band chaos for progressions.

Video 2. The Russian Lunge is an example of taking a rearfoot elevated split squat and adding a motor control component. By placing the back leg on a suspended heavy band, the athlete requires a greater demand of front leg stability, which emphasizes strength on the front leg’s hamstrings and glutes with posterior leg control.

In order for an athlete to have strong single leg balance, they have to understand how to ground or “melt” their foot into the floor to feel that connection. Foot/ground connection is a vital underlying part of weightlifting in terms of weight distribution, ground force production, and drive into triple extension. Intrinsic foot strength is also a strong predictor for dorsiflexion, which is critical in the bottom position of both the clean and snatch.

This exercise is also a good place to cue the intention and importance of the foot. As with each of these movements, don’t be afraid to build in progressions to challenge your athletes by holding equipment in different positions, such as:

• Overhead
• Single arm
• Goblet hold
• Barbell front rack
• Other variations

Below is a chart of some go-to exercises, and a playlist with demonstrations of each exercise listed is available here. I like to think outside of the platform and challenge my athletes to try things that are different. I want them to get out of their comfort zone in order to become a better athlete mentally and physically, and GPP/accessory movements are a great place to start.

I want athletes to get out of their comfort zone in order to become a better athlete mentally and physically, and GPP/accessory movements are a great place to start, says @nicc__marie. Share on X

There are infinite combinations of position/load/band placement for each of these movements to progress and add variety. Alternate from bilateral to unilateral, change the plane of movement, adjust load positioning, and add oscillating load. Some of these movements are sport-specific and others help improve positional work and limitations that are compensated for with a barbell. Regardless of how you create variability, it will expose weaknesses within your athletes to help improve their durability and longevity in the sport.

From Adaptability to Durability

The amount of GPP an athlete needs will be dependent on their training history, current sport season, and injury history. Not only do weightlifters benefit, but clientele in the general population who are interested in getting into Olympic weightlifting can look at these movements as a way to help develop the positional and muscular strength needed to start.

Athletes and the general population will always see a benefit to these movements, as long as they are presented and performed with proper volume, load, and intention. As coaches, we strive to keep our athletes healthy and continuously progressing over time. By incorporating more non-barbell exercises as a form of GPP training or accessory work, we can provide a better foundation for our athletes. Don’t be afraid to try something different and force the athlete to move and adapt. The more adaptable they are, the more durable they will become.

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

Whether the moniker is mat drill, winter workouts, or coach’s circuits, they’re essentially the same, just a horse of a slightly different color. Mat drills have been a spring football right of passage in a high percentage of college programs since the mid-eighties and the validity and subsequent use of mat drills will be a debate till the end of time. Whether you are an opponent or proponent of mat drills, there is one thing that I am confident in: they are not going away!

College football coaches will argue with their performance staffs on how vital the drills are to building a program. College strength coaches will argue with each other on the validity and ramifications of mat drills with respect to the development of their athletes. Proponents of mat drills will steadfastly dig their heels into the ground on the basis that these drills are necessary to develop mental toughness, even though there is no quantitative proof of this—any statement otherwise is purely anecdotal.

Till the end of days, you will never convince either side to change their colors. In thirty years of mat drill use, no one has offered a solution that would be agreeable to both sides of the argument—or, more importantly, an alternative solution that would better benefit the athletes as well as the team.

What is Mental Toughness?

I am a firm believer that mental toughness is a conscious choice. Former Navy SEAL Jocko Willink has said as much, stating: “If you want to be tougher mentally, it’s simple: be tougher!” Sports scientist Dr. Erik Korem goes a step further, claiming: “Mental toughness is task specific.”

I am a firm believer that mental toughness is a conscious choice, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

Toughness, then, is highly situational. Different situations will develop different degrees of mental toughness; consequently, toughness in one situation does not result in toughness in another. In his book The Governing Dynamics of Coaching, James Smith quotes a scene from the movie Man on Fire: “There is no such thing as tough. There is trained, and untrained. Now which are you?” The more an athlete is physically and mentally prepared for a situation, the more that athlete will exhibit a higher grade of toughness in that domain. An athlete that is ill-prepared for a particular situation will exhibit a heightened stress response from that lack of preparation. If mental toughness is a key objective for a program, then they should be prepared for the task at hand to the highest degree.

From a logical point of view, the key to developing a tough team would be to set a system in place where the athlete is trained to a standard that matches how they will compete. This raises some questions: if we are not going to compete against another program in mat drills on Saturdays, why do they need to be so tough? And why should we even waste a month or more of valuable time executing them?

Now here is where I am going to lose my newfound fans that are opponents of mat drills: all teams, young and old, will not achieve a championship season if they are not held to the highest of standards in training, practice, academics, and social life. Mat drills are a modality that facilitates a high standard of training in a team setting with the entire football staff. Alone, the entirety of this setting cannot be replicated by the performance staff. Standards are set and upheld in every facet of the workout, and key factors are graded. Such factors include:

• Body language
• Conscious intent performing the drill
• Competitive spirit
• Leadership

The discipline of rising to the standard over and over in each drill is an expression of mental toughness. Everything that is graded can be taught to and accomplished by each athlete, if communicated in the right manner. Each athlete will have an opportunity to make the choice to compete—especially if they understand that competing at the highest level will directly benefit them.

The Purpose is the Bond

I feel that mat drills serve an important purpose in building team culture. Studies have shown that males will bond to a higher degree when they go through a mentally and physically taxing situation. The more stress they endure together, the tighter their bond. This is why I lean towards being a proponent of mat drills. Why do so many companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to send their employees to ropes courses?

Because it helps individual employees become a tribe.

The more stress the athletes endure together, the tighter their bond, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

Here is where most performance professionals will disagree with their football coach brethren: these drills in no way enhance the physical capabilities of the football athlete. Most drills selected are basic, poorly performed change of direction drills that in no way develop the athlete at their respective position. There is zero technical information that is given to the athlete or processed by the athlete, just a lot of yelling to move faster.

These drills might include:

• L-drill
• 20-yard pro-agility shuttle
• Basic bag drills
• Zig-zag drill

That is why buy-in from the athletes is not very high. Most athletes want to compete and they want to outwork other athletes and other programs, but they want to do it while getting better at their position.

The Importance of Drill Selection

We only have 15 spring practice days a year and we only have 25 fall camp practices. The NCAA is currently talking about dropping it to 20 fall camp days. Out of 365 days, we have only 40 days to hone the football skills of our athletes as a full staff.

Most programs will initiate between eight and fifteen mat drill sessions per off-season in February/March leading into spring football practice. Time is an expensive commodity when it comes to developing a collegiate football team. With the short amount of time a staff has to develop a team, it stands to reason we should think through every opportunity. Why then, in the collective field of football and performance coaches, are we prescribing basic drills that do not carry over to the game when we could be getting a jumpstart on technical football training before spring football starts?

Time is an expensive commodity when it comes to developing a collegiate football team, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

Performing eight to twelve days of individual drills before spring ball begins will enable the football staff to decrease the amount of individual drill time and expand more team drills. It will also cut down on long practices—thus keeping the players fresh—and it will decrease the chances of injury because the athlete would not be in a continual state of fatigue. The previous statement will not make football coaches happy because if you have 120 minutes to practice then we better damn well use all of them. Out of the 120 minutes of practice, you could at least alleviate 20-30 minutes of useless filler drills that only fatigue the athlete and increase their load. If you make practices faster and sharper with fewer mistakes and your athletes come out of it healthier…I think you won the day!

What constitutes a useful tool in the development of an athlete at each position? The archaic rules instituted by the NCAA will hamper us somewhat because of the lack of hand-held shields and the use of a football. This is where the art of programming, a deviant mind, and collaboration with the position coach comes in.

You don’t need a shield or pads to teach offensive lineman stance, stab steps, redirection, hand placement technique, or striking skills. You can utilize rugby balls, tennis balls, bricks, or HECOstix to perform ball security, catching, and throwing drills. For defensive tackling drills, incorporating the USA Football tackling system and adding tackling drills with a rolling doughnut will get the basics laid down before spring ball starts. Most position drills will be dictated by the system that the individual position coaches instill in spring and fall practices—a staff is only limited by their imagination and technical ability (or lack thereof)!

Setting Standards (or “The Way”)

I believe mat drills have a place in college football because they help build a tribe and cement standards. However, the drills do not do the work. Most football coaches believe that the culture of the team is set during mat drills and carries over through the fall season, but this is not the case. Coaches will say things like “We won X amount of games because of mat drills” or “We won conference because of mat drills.” Unless these coaches have exceptional athletes, they are probably going to be looking for jobs in January because mat drills don’t win football games, athletes do.

The standard is set the first day the athletes return from break in January, during off-season winter training. This standard allows for more technical training to be accomplished during mat drills, as well as solidifying the culture. The standard is then kept up through off-season summer training, allowing the performance staff to advance training schemes to ready the athletes for fall camp. This allows the football staff to progress the team faster in preparation for the first game. This process is repeated each week in preparation for each opponent. The standard is the standard, and is never lowered throughout the year. Some call it “The Process,” some call it “The Way.” It does not mater what it is called, as long as it is enforced year-round.

The standard is the standard, and is never lowered throughout the year, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

The standard starts with how they enter the field, with strong body language and positive verbiage. If a player walks onto the field or doesn’t have a smile on their face, they are sent off to return appropriately. This progresses to the focus and attention to detail in the warmup. If one athlete is not focused, then the warmup starts over. Things fall apart when a coach gets lazy in paying attention to the details and the standard. The standard is the standard! If a coach expects an athlete to be mentally tough, then the coach should be mentally tough in upholding those standards. Every drill should have a communicated standard and it should be upheld. For example, the following is a list of things a coach should look for during a drill:

The drill: OL medicine ball stab step

• Focus
• Technical proficiency
• Speed of movement
• Competitive spirit
• Finishing
• Positive leadership talk
• Backstage coaching (older athletes coaching younger athletes off drill)

Every drill should be filmed and graded during each workout. Athletes could be put into different colored jerseys depending on how well they performed in that particular workout.

My biggest pet peeve with coaches running their drills is when an athlete does everything right but the drill itself and the coach doesn’t reprimand the athlete for it. The athlete moved fast, competed, and finished strong…but half-assed the drill. This translates into this same player giving an unbelievable effort in a game, but going the wrong direction during the play. Mental toughness is being disciplined in focus and action, repetitively, within a task.

Mental toughness is being disciplined in focus and action, repetitively, within a task, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

The Art of Programming

It is difficult to convince the football staff that two mat drill sessions per week with position-specific drills would situate a team to take full advantage of their fifteen allotted spring practices. It is an easier sell to the staff if your programming during your winter training block can follow the same lines as the mat drill training block.

It is possible to correctly program around accomplishing two mat drill sessions per week without significantly decreasing the absolute strength and power outputs of your athletes. You will see decreases in speed and that will be tough to mitigate, but it can be done without skipping a step for the most part. Test your athletes in the vertical jump and a flying 10 every Monday before their lift throughout the mat drill training block. You will get a better feel for the training adaptations of your athletes and will be able to adjust your programming to keep the athletes progressing.

Technical skill before competitive will. What I mean by this is that technical skill should be taught when the athletes are fresh. An athlete will not perform the basics with any technical ability while fatigued. Once the athlete has mastered the basics, then initiate fatigue and stress. Technical drills should be performed in the early periods and competition/high intensity drills in the later periods.

An athlete will not perform the basics with any technical ability while fatigued, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

There are many ways to skin the mat drill exercise. The more position-specific, the better the drill. I suggest working with each position coach on selecting drills that they would program into a practice schedule, and then writing a standard for each drill. Again, the standard at which the drill is performed is an aspect of mental toughness. To satisfy football coaches that want high intensity, effort, and strain, program change of direction drills or agility drills halfway through the workout and ramp up the intensity. There are several ways to format the training session, and the length of the session could be between 60-75 minutes to satisfy all parties.

Final Thoughts

By programming drills that directly affect the abilities of athletes in their respective positions, there is far greater buy-in from the athlete. With this increase in motivation, I have seen greater effort from the athletes, as they feel their intensity and focus is being rewarded.

The above mat drill scenario is not perfect and can be programmed to a higher level, but it is a start. Mat drills should involve micro-doses of speed work at the beginning of the session, then progress through a few agility drills before moving into position-specific drills and ending with either a position or team competition. Your athletes would therefore not lose any gains in absolute strength, power, or (more importantly) speed during the mat drill training block. You would then have something proponents and opponents would be happy with.

As a field we can always do better. Deconstructing and reconstructing mat drills is just one instance, though it is one that would loom large for a program. The key is to educate the football staff, and if they refuse to listen, do everything in your power to mitigate the adverse physical effects of mat drill sessions. As coaches, we owe it to our athletes and to the field to be better, do better, and progress from what has always been done.

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

Plantiga is a company that has developed a research-grade computer analysis platform and wearable sensor that slides into a pre-fashioned inner sole for the latest in wearable technology.

The sensor is an IMU (inertial measurement unit) that weighs just 17.5 grams. Depending on the footwear, the athlete is barely aware of it. This allows for data collection in the functional task of interest without the changes to athlete behavior that occur in a lab setting or using correlation studies to draw inferences back to the area of interest.

Plantiga’s IMU allows for data collection in the functional task of interest without the changes to athlete behavior that occur in a lab setting. Share on X

Wearable biometric devices are fast becoming a must-have for every athlete, from the recreational to the elite. Dr. Matt Jordan wrote for SimpliFaster outlining the history and development of wearable monitoring, the validation studies, and what sets Plantiga apart with its plans for the future using AI algorithms to aid the practitioner.

How to Use Plantiga

As a sports physio, my main area of work is in athletics. The basis of this article is how I have been using Plantiga in the field to improve performance as well as monitor and guide end-stage rehabilitation strategies. A future article is planned on how Plantiga is used within the clinic, but in the meantime, you can read many such articles on the Plantiga blog.

The Basics (Which Are Far from Basic)

The beauty of Plantiga is that you can select the test that is most relevant to you and your athlete. There are numerous suggested tests where normative data has been collected that demonstrated reliability. These are walking, self-selected pace running, change of direction, workload monitoring within session, countermovement jumps, repeated hopping, single leg hop for height, and single leg hop for distance. Plantiga has described and video guided a methodology via their app to assist with reliability.

The review function summarizes the metrics related to each task and highlights metrics that fall outside of the growing body of collected normative data to aid in further analysis. Data such as top speed, average speed, cadence, stride length, peak acceleration and deceleration, ground contact time, flight time ratio, and distance are all very usable measures that the practitioner can pull up within minutes of testing. (Example is image 2a.)

Plantiga then goes further…

By having the IMU in the shoe, it can act as more than just a contact mat. It can detect acceleration changes that will give information on force while the athlete is moving. The review will break down the overall load experienced within a session, as well as across limbs and over time (intensity). It then calculates the asymmetry across sides to provide information to the practitioner on right/left discrepancies in load, ground contact time, and stride length. (See image 2b.)

By having the IMU in the shoe, it can act as more than just a contact mat. It can detect acceleration changes that will give information on force WHILE the athlete is moving. Share on X

This can then provide meaningful baseline data on willingness to load and limb kinetic function, but more significantly, it can provide a signposted pathway of the athlete’s rehabilitation or performance history. We can see in image 2b under load asymmetry a graphical representation of changes over time that the dashboard automatically generates. For ease, the practitioner can create notes on the focus or intervention within each session for historical referencing.

Barrie Jennings of NZ Speedworks uses this feature with Cyclic CMJ in elite netballers.

By using Plantiga’s analysis system, Barrie was able to show the coaching staff objectively what they were observing in training. The athlete was using her right side far more than her left, affecting her performance and risking potential reinjury. The coaching team decided to modify the athlete’s training to reduce the number of high-intensity sessions. Retesting showed a return to pre-aggravation levels by September without setback or injury.

The Advanced

When I have an athlete, I like to perform the one-minute walk test and the two-minute (self-selected pace) run. These two tests provide wonderful insight into how the athlete moves habitually via the “movement map.”

I will utilize these “maps” to correlate with what I am seeing within the clinic or on the track.

Movement maps are complicated, and your interpretation improves with practice (and often after discussion with the amazing staff of Plantiga!). An outline on how they are generated can be found here, and image 3c is a guide to what part of the gait cycle you are looking at when attempting to interpret.

An entire article could be written on analyzing movement maps, but I will attempt to give you a snapshot.

In image 4, I have enlarged the last section of the walk test (image 3a), which measures the foot add/abduction motion. The highlighted section shows an increase in movement (longer lines) at left toe-off and right heel strike, as well as more movement variability (thicker lines) at right heel strike.

In a normal walking pattern, the left leg is in contact with the ground here, so my attention at the track and within the clinic may be drawn to what is creating this. In this case, this athlete has a mild left gluteus medius tendinopathy and left sinus tarsi irritation that may be affecting his left stance phase. Intervention here and then reassessment using Plantiga can help to determine this within the clinic.

With the image above, I have enlarged the top section of the run test, which looks at lateral accelerations. The highlighted section shows clearly that this athlete has an issue with the left limb from heel strike through swing to toe-off, as seen by the thicker lines (more variable movement) compared to the right limb. (See image 3c as a reference point for movement map analysis.)

This athlete has a long history of chronic left-sided limb injury, so we will aim rehabilitation strategies at improving their left lateral chain and abduction/adduction control before retesting to aid in determining their efficacy.

The Individualized

There are often times when a test does not highlight what we may see in the field, and it leaves us scrambling for objective data that not only tells us if we are progressing, but also informs our decision-making on where intervention may make the greatest impact.

This is where Plantiga is a game changer.

I am going to give two brief case examples of Plantiga helping guide athletes’ training focus both in the gym and at the track.

1. Within Session Changes to Block Starts

Since a back injury, an elite-level sprinter (10.40 PB) has found it difficult to generate the power out of the blocks that he successfully had in the past.

The above image highlights that the acceleration “out of the blocks” of the right leg (back leg in the blocks) was just 14.65G (unit of gravity).

Of interest are the grey areas indicating flight time of the limb, and consequently, the white shows when the limb is in contact with the ground.

A review of this section is shown in image 8. However, due to the deceleration phase being present, only maximum speed (8.56 m/s), peak acceleration (5.00 m/s²) and ground contact time (98 milliseconds left, 104 milliseconds right) are truly of interest.

So, what did we do?

The intervention for this is not in the scope of this blog post. However, I have written previously for SimpliFaster on direction bias assessment and direction bias programming and utilized these methods within the session before testing again.

Reassessment

The athlete repeated the block start to 30 meters and obtained improvements to 19.01G on the first step (image 10a), maximum speed of 9.13 m/s (from 8.56%), and peak acceleration to 5.21 m/s² (from 5.00 m/s²) (image 10b), and an improvement in load and ground contact time asymmetry from 9.80% to 4.88% and 5.77% to 0.00%.

While in this event it can’t be said that the intervention was responsible for the improvement, it does demonstrate the usefulness of Plantiga to the practitioner/coach at the track. Within a few minutes of testing, the baseline showed a large asymmetry to the right limb and the low acceleration observed at first step, which correlated with the athlete reporting that he “felt flat and couldn’t activate.”

An intervention based on past clinical assessment was supported by the objective data from Plantiga, indicating that it would be added to future warm-up protocols for the athlete’s sessions.

2. The Long Jumper

Plantiga was used with an elite long jumper (8.05-meter PB) to:

1. Determine the forces exerted at takeoff and the penultimate step to aid in finding limits to gym programming.
2. Compare force/load production between sides in a series of single leg bounds.

The data that we wanted to extract has been highlighted as 25.31G at the penultimate step and 21.94G at the left foot takeoff.

Bounding

The grey areas indicating flight time of the non-involved leg clearly show which leg was not “hopping” in the activity but also demonstrate the amount of load still experienced by that side. By hovering the cursor over the end of each loading phase, we are able to measure the load created at toe-off of each bound. Figure 5 (top) shows that the fifth “hop” experienced at 17.54G compared to the example on the left in figure 5 (bottom) of 12.83G.

Furthermore, there was a “drop-off” in load on the left over the six hops in this example of 10.7%, from 14.2G to 12.83G (average 13.57G), compared to a 3.0% drop-off on the right 17.9G to 17.3G (average 17.62G). This indicates that the left was not able to create and absorb the same load as the right and showed less capacity over repeated hops.

This information is a great way to create a conversation with the strength and technical coaches to discuss program design for optimal loading and then follow it up with reassessment. From this example, we went on to discuss that bounding was not eliciting the same force as the last two steps of a long jump, so adding a weight vest or more depth jumps progressively would be considered. Additionally, more focus would be placed clinically on the left side’s readiness to load as well as on eccentric rate of force development.

Future Use

Plantiga in its current form has a wide scope of use in the ways that have been discussed but also in athlete monitoring in rehabilitation, return to sport, and return to performance scenarios. Load asymmetry can be tracked over time and, when tests are repeated in a standardized format, so can performance and overall load and intensity values.

The monthly subscription model to Plantiga essentially pays for itself with 4-5 assessments a month, making it within financial reach for most practitioners. Share on X

From a financial point of view, clubs and individual athletes have been willing to pay for individualized testing of this research-grade equipment to give them insights on how to improve performance and reduce injury risk. Once satisfied, the athlete will return at important intervals (pre-season, pre-competition, or recent injury) to be reassessed for even deeper analysis. This shows that the monthly subscription model to Plantiga essentially pays for itself with 4-5 assessments a month, making it within financial reach for most practitioners. This in conjunction with its four-hour battery life, quick upload speed, unobtrusiveness, and portability, make it my favorite tool in and out of the clinic.

However, the really exciting part is what Plantiga is working on for the future. With its use of “deep learning” AI, it is collecting data on every test to not only improve its accuracy but also to start acting as a prediction tool for injury based on how the athlete moves. This is essentially the holy grail of sports medicine and just maybe it’s getting a little closer.

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

Squash match play can be fast and frenetic, characterised by many short, sharp explosive movements, accelerations, decelerations and changes of direction. Contemporary stars such as Mohamed El Shorbagy, Paul Coll and Miguel Rodríguez can be seen darting around the court, sprinting from corner to corner to pick up a drop shot or leaping sideways across the T to take an early volley. The high intensity, explosive moments usually determine the outcome of key points and the momentum and result of the match. Speed and agility are clearly vital attributes determining success in squash, and this importance should be reflected in the structure and detail of your training programme.

The biggest error that athletes and coaches make in training speed and agility is a lack of rest and a consequent lack of intensity and quality, says @Coach_ChrisG. Share on X

The biggest error that athletes and coaches make in training speed and agility is a lack of rest and a consequent lack of intensity and quality. If your goal is to develop speed and agility, then the repetitions need to be high quality, explosive efforts with long rest periods. Sprints need to be as close to maximal as possible. For speed development it is a case of quality over quantity. It may sound obvious, but a popular coaching expression is:

“To be fast you have to run fast!”

This phrase concisely explains the need for high quality, high intensity efforts with sufficient rest; positioned during your weekly and daily training programme when you are fresh and ready to be explosive. When a player is clearly fatigued and there is a breakdown in technical competence that should signal the end of the rep, set or exercise rather than blindly adhering to the number pre-determined on the programme.

There is, of course, some interplay between the different physical and physiological attributes required for successful squash performance. For example, training for speed is complemented by strength and power training, plyometrics, flexibility and mobility. These attributes are addressed in their own chapters within this book. Whilst it may be tempting to think of speed and agility as combined abilities, one does not necessarily translate directly to the other, and it is more appropriate to consider each quality in isolation.

Speed

The best place to look for strategies to develop speed, or at the very least guide you in the right direction, is with the experts from athletics. No one knows more about harnessing and improving straight line sprinting speed than track athletes and coaches. Whilst squash athletes are not 100m sprinters, nor will they ever get close to covering anywhere near that distance in a straight-line sprint on court (the maximal sprint would be under 10m), building your technical and physical training model from knowledge extrapolated from these experts is the ideal foundation. Whilst it is acknowledged that straight line speed must be translated into more sport specific movements, observing the training methods of a track sprinter can teach the court-based athlete a lot about violent intent of movement, explosiveness, application of forces and body angles.

“Intent is every bit as important as one’s movement quality…

…One must move boldly and with a ‘violent grace.’”

–Brett Bartholomew, Strength & Conditioning Coach and founder of Art of Coaching

If you want evidence of the need for speed in squash, go to YouTube and search for “outrageous dive & winner – best retrieval ever”! Speed, and sprint training, is important in most sports, not just athletics, yet many athletes never learn correct sprinting technique. The website squashskills.com provides a strong recommendation for the importance of speed training for squash players: “Speed training is all about quality over quantity – so short, sharp efforts interspersed with longer recovery periods. As your speed improves, think about trying to not just use your speed to retrieve the ball and defend, but to actually use your speed to apply pressure and attack by getting onto your shots that bit earlier”.

Speed is a global term that may represent several related, but individually distinct, abilities. Conceptually, speed can be considered to consist of the following elements:

• Acceleration – The rate at which an athlete can increase speed to maximal levels.
• Max Velocity – The maximal speed an athlete can attain.
• Speed Endurance – The ability to sustain maximal or near-maximal velocity.

The phase of greatest interest to a squash player is acceleration; the ability to move from stationary to achieving the highest speed in the shortest time possible. The majority of movements in squash involve only 2 or 3 steps, and the ability to initiate and execute these movements as quickly and explosively as possible can be the difference between winning and losing a point, a game and ultimately a match. A squash player may never sprint in excess of 10 metres on court, but it is common practice across many sports to train athletes to move quickly over distances greater than that which they will perform in competition. For example, football (soccer) and rugby players may sprint over 30 or 40 metres in training even though most sprints in a match are typically 10-20m or less. There are two major reasons for this:

• If you only prepare for the average demands of your sport you are under-prepared for the most demanding passages of play. These are usually the critical moments in a match!
• Optimal development of acceleration and speed demands that training occurs over more than the 5m, 10m or 20m an athlete typically sprints over in their sport.

If you only prepare for the average demands of your sport, you are underprepared for the most demanding passages of play. These are usually the critical moments in a match, says @Coach_ChrisG. Share on X

In trained athletes, acceleration occurs for 30-40m – even farther in elite sprinters. If you only practise moving quickly over 3 or 4 steps, you will fail to realise the full benefits of your speed and acceleration training. Therefore, it may be beneficial if a certain proportion of a squash player’s speed training is completed over distances in excess of 5-10m. Remember that your strength and conditioning work aims to enhance physical qualities above those of your typical squash training and match play. You are not trying to merely replicate the demands of the sport. The aim is to distort the game; to develop physical qualities above and beyond the demands of match play. If your capacity exceeds the demands of the sport, each point, rally or movement challenging that quality will be at a relative lower intensity.

Through understanding table 4.1, it becomes apparent that essential to effective sprint performance is the ability to apply the greatest force in the right direction in the shortest amount of time (whilst maintaining a smaller mass – speed is dependent on force relative to mass, highlighting the importance of body composition). Analysis of elite sprinters reveals that “faster top running speeds are achieved with greater ground forces not more rapid leg movements”. (Keep this in mind when speed and agility ladders are discussed later in this chapter!) It is the force applied to the floor and not the movement of the swing leg that differentiates elite level sprinters from slower counterparts. How the swing leg moves in recovery is largely dictated by what happens when your foot is on the ground. This knowledge should influence how squash athletes train for speed.

Normative data outlining performance standards for squash are not readily available, and so generic athletic standards or standards for other racket sports may provide a benchmark until such time as squash standards are published or you have collated your own data. It is useful to note that national governing bodies in tennis outline standards for 5m, 10m and 20m sprints for all age groups and across both sexes (refer to the Performance Testing and Athlete Monitoring chapter). Whilst tennis is contested over a larger court with larger sprint distances covered, it can reasonably be assumed that at least 5m and 10m sprint times would be appropriate performance indicators for squash.

Reaction Speed and Anticipation

Reaction time describes the interval between the emergence of a stimulus and the initiation of a response. It is not enough for a player to be physically quick; they must also recognise and respond appropriately to stimuli on court such as the movement and sound of the ball and the movement of an opponent’s body and racket. A major determinant of the transfer of speed and agility training to the court is the specificity of the stimuli used. The more specific the stimulus, the greater the transfer, and this is particularly important for the mental processing components. Players accumulate a large amount of time on court reacting to the most sports specific stimuli, and the abilities of reaction time and anticipation are best developed in squash specific drills. In speed and agility sessions, players are often responding to whistles, cones, verbal commands and signals reducing the specificity of these drills.

There is a compelling argument that strength and conditioning sessions are best devoted to developing physical qualities which enhance speed, says @Coach_ChrisG. Share on X

Therefore, there is a compelling argument that strength and conditioning sessions are best devoted to developing physical qualities which enhance speed. On-court sessions, under the guidance of the squash coach, may provide the most appropriate environment for developing sport specific skills of anticipation and reaction time. This can be complemented by maximal sprint training in strength and conditioning sessions. The concept of “give them what the sport doesn’t” is discussed in greater detail in the Coaching Philosophy and Guiding Principles section towards the end of this book. Speed training may still involve a certain amount of reactive ability such as responding to the coach’s command or in reaction to an opponent in a drill, but the emphasis should be on powerful and efficient movement mechanics.

Speed Reserve

As previously discussed, sprinting over greater distances in training can be beneficial to athletes who typically sprint over shorter durations in competition. Inclusion of longer sprints can benefit acceleration and other aspects of squash performance.

“Even though the confines of a court only allow them to sprint 5-8m at most, the benefits of sprints out to 30m in training can transfer significantly for these types of athletes in the form of CNS training, improving elasticity and overall general strength and speed benefits.”

–Derek Hansen, highly respected Canadian Strength & Conditioning Specialist

Athletes with a greater maximum velocity typically have a greater rate of change of velocity, more commonly known as acceleration. Athletes with a higher top speed accelerate faster and so reach higher velocities earlier in a sprint.

For a player with greater top speed, a submaximal sprint at any given speed is achieved at a lower cost relative to a slower opponent (figure 4.1). To illustrate this in simple terms, if an athlete has a maximum velocity of 9 m/s and they have to complete a number of 9 m/s sprints, then these efforts will be relatively more demanding (100%) for that athlete than another athlete with a maximum velocity of 10 m/s (90%). Having a greater potential for speed and acceleration means the sprints performed in a match are at a relatively lower cost to the athlete, facilitating greater energy conservation and efficiency.

Whilst many coaches understandably prioritise agility training over straight line speed, the value of squash specific practice to the development of squash specific movement skills should not be overlooked. With players on court four or five days a week, the volume of sport specific movements performed is very high, and this should be factored into the overall training plan. The recommendation is not for speed training to take precedence over agility. Instead, development of linear speed should be viewed as complementary to sport-specific movement skills.

The remaining bio-motor ability relating to speed, speed-endurance, has little value in squash. Speed endurance refers to the ability to maintain velocity at or close to maximum, occurring only once maximum velocity has been achieved. As squash players do not have the time or distance to create maximal running speeds, they have no need for being able to sustain or to train and develop speed endurance. This should not be confused with repeated sprint ability, which is the ability to perform several high intensity efforts, often with short or incomplete recovery.

Repeated Sprint Ability

“An athlete who has exceptional maximal sprint capabilities can still operate at very high speeds during a match or game and not fatigue, since most sports operate at much slower speeds as proven by GPS technology. Thus, an athlete that is well trained from a sprinting perspective will always demonstrate exceptional RSA throughout practice or competition.”

–Derek Hansen, highly respected Canadian Strength & Conditioning Specialist

Comparisons of the different levels in the National Squash programme in England, from talented juniors right through to established world tour players, led researchers to identify RSA and lower body explosive capabilities as key physical performance indicators for elite squash performance. (Reactive strength and lower body explosive power determine change of direction speed and thus influence RSA.) Whilst these “sprints” or high intensity efforts do not exactly resemble the image of Usain Bolt striding down the track, successful squash performance is linked to the ability to repeatedly produce fast, powerful, high intensity efforts interspersed with periods of lower intensity activity.

RSA can actually be a more complex metric than it may initially appear with a combination of neural and metabolic factors affecting performance, says @Coach_ChrisG. Share on X

RSA can actually be a more complex metric than it may initially appear with a combination of neural and metabolic factors affecting performance. Inherent to RSA are: the ability to perform a fast sprint, the ability to repeat close to maximal sprint ability again and again with minimal increases in time and the ability to do this with incomplete or short recovery.

To assess RSA, sports scientists will measure:

• Best Sprint time
• Total Sprint time (aggregated time of all sprints)
• Average Sprint time
• Worst Sprint time
• Fatigue Index (FI – the decline in performance from the best to worst sprint)
• Sprint Decrement (S_dec – comparing actual performance to an idealised performance where the best effort would be reproduced in each sprint)

Analysis of one or two of these measurements alone can give an inaccurate assessment of an athlete’s RSA. For example, an athlete who does not slow down much from the first sprint to the last will have a good fatigue index, sprint decrement and apparently a good RSA. But if their initial sprint speed is slow then they do not demonstrate effective RSA, and an athlete with higher fatigue index and sprint decrement but a faster best sprint time may in fact demonstrate superior RSA. A higher sprint decrement score does not always indicate a poorer RSA; greater RSA is demonstrated by superior average sprint performance, with or without a low fatigue index.

A higher sprint decrement score does not always indicate a poorer RSA; greater RSA is demonstrated by superior average sprint performance, with or without a low fatigue index, says @Coach_ChrisG. Share on X

“Repeat speed qualities start with the ability to produce speed first…

…the decay of output is usually not as important.”

– Carl Valle, USATF II Coach, Sports Tech & Performance Analysis Consultant

When training to improve RSA, two primary training theories have been proposed:

• According to the principle of training specificity, the best way to train RSA is to perform repeated sprints.
• Employ training interventions that target the main factors limiting RSA.

Research indicates that maximising RSA is linked to improving single-sprint performance. In addition, the ability to excel in an RSA sport is dependent upon the aerobic capability of the athlete. Furthermore, extensive review of the available research suggests there is not one type of training that can be recommended to best improve RSA and concludes:

“1. It is important to include some training to improve single-sprint performance. This should include (i) specific sprint training; (ii) strength/power training; and (iii) occasional high-intensity (>VO₂max) training (e.g., repeated, 30-second, all-out efforts separated by ~10 minutes of recovery) to increase the anaerobic capacity.

2. It is also important to include some interval training to best improve the ability to recover between sprints (if the goal is to improve fatigue resistance). High-intensity (80-90% VO₂max) interval training, interspersed with rest periods (e.g., 1 minute) that are shorter than the work periods (e.g., 2 minutes) is efficient at improving the ability to recover between sprints by increasing aerobic fitness (VO₂max and the lactate threshold), the rate of phosphocreatine re-synthesis and intracellular buffering (the removal of H⁺ build up).”
(Bishop et al 2011)

General recommendations for improving RSA are as follows: squash players should train to develop maximal qualities in speed, agility, strength and power. When maximal capacity is high, any given submaximal effort will be relatively less demanding for the athlete. These maximal capacities should be supported by aerobic interval training and more specific RSA efforts and incorporate sports specific movements.

Examples of different repeated-sprint ability training sessions include:

1. 10 x 20m sprints with walk back recovery
2. 10 x 6-10s cycle sprint w/ 30s recovery
3. 10 x 6-10s cycle sprint w/ 3min recovery. The different recovery protocols between ii and iii produce very different physiological responses. (ii assists in maintaining power output across each subsequent sprint effort in training and matches. iii enhances maximal power output).
4. 8-10 x 10-15s or specified number of shots ghosting w/ 30s recovery.

As RSA training can be highly fatiguing, and when inappropriately prescribed may lead to a decrement in RSA performance, this kind of training should be implemented at a lower frequency within the overall training plan. Research investigating the influence of ‘traditional’ sprint training on RSA is lacking, with many sports scientists believing such training may produce greater improvements in both best sprint time and mean sprint time. Therefore, specialised RSA training may be unnecessary.

The preceding article is excerpted from Chris Gallagher’s book Strength and Conditioning for Squash, which you can find here.

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