Blog

Coaching high school track and field in the winter can pose a challenge in and of itself. But then, add a pandemic into the mix, affecting weight room time, practice time, and the bodies of the athletes. Finally, include some winter track meets held OUTDOORS (no, this is not the norm).

Over the past year, we track and field coaches have had to make some serious pivots in our training and how we coach the events in general. Specifically, this past winter season, preparation and communication with our athletes was our objective. Since the cold weather really limited our practice time, we stressed the importance of quality versus quantity and to trust the process.

I coach the field events: jumps and throws. This is a challenge in the cold Northeast, as I can’t have the athletes standing around waiting to throw or jump. As coaches, optimizing performance and injury prevention is our goal, and in this article, I explain what we have done with those athletes that resulted in absolute success.

Starting with a Plan

First, all of our athletes warm up as a team—when it’s freezing out, if you don’t have your athletes warm up properly, that’s a mistake. The goals of the warm-up are:

• Mimic the actions of the movements they will perform in practice.
• Activate the central nervous system.
• Injury prevention.
• Create routine.

This system we have developed over time has significantly decreased injury (to none at all, actually), enhanced performance, and created a routine for the athletes to prepare them for their meet day.

Next, I have designed a training plan for the shot putters on specific days (of course, depending on those variables mentioned above): shot put drills and technique, strength training, short sprints, and plyometrics. This season, I usually had 6-8 male throwers and 8 female throwers and alternated these training days as well; again, because I can’t have my athletes standing around in the cold waiting to throw. You must have a plan, but also know you always need to be able to pivot. My female throwers had thrown before, but all but one male thrower was a novice, so in some ways I was starting from scratch in teaching winter shot put.

Although training in the cold is a challenge, I believe it makes the athlete’s capabilities that much better—they’re prepared for anything…, says @bpfitcoaching. Share on X

Our success rate was high following this training plan: no injuries, no athletes ever fouled, all of my throwers qualified in the top 6 rankings, all hit PRs, and two would have qualified for the CHSAA State Meet if we had one. Although training in the cold was a challenge, I believe it makes the athletes’ capabilities that much better—they were prepared for anything and developed a routine that they now can take with them into spring season and/or other sports they play. I have broken down the basics of the first steps to know as a coach for teaching winter shot put, where to start (especially with novice throwers), and our training plan, all to help you get throwers stronger and prepared to throw in the cold.

Basics of Shot Put

During winter season in high school, throwing is mostly all done outdoors. We train in the snow and freezing weather, with the ring (circle) covered in snow the majority of the time. As stated previously, this develops athletic capabilities and gets your athletes prepared for anything, especially competition. Still, as a coach, it is imperative to make sure your athletes understand effective preparation: dressing appropriately for the cold, wearing proper throwing shoes and gloves, and—most importantly—showing up regularly. Consistency is KEY.

The shot put requires TLC. This means they are stored away properly, and towels are available to clean them off—there’s no fooling around with these objects. NO athletes are allowed near or in the circle while another thrower is in the circle! All spectators must be at least a foot away from the circle/netting. Throwing implements are, in fact, deadly and dangerous. Make this clear to your athletes. The circle also needs some love—make sure it is cleaned off. (I use a broom or a shovel to sweep off the snow and keep it on hand for athletes to use.)

Normally, I have a co-ed group: As a coach, you need to know that each athlete is different, so coach accordingly. My female athletes need a bit more of a push to be aggressive, because, well…. throwing requires power! With my male athletes, I tend to have to scale back, so they don’t throw out an arm. Not only that, but when we are out in the cold, my female athletes can only handle so much. Do not have them outside for too long if they can’t handle the weather—this is where poor mechanics come in and that can lead to injury.

Do not have athletes outside for too long if they can’t handle the weather—this is where poor mechanics come in and that can lead to injury, says @bpfitcoaching. Share on X

Technique and Mechanics

The goal for every shot putter is to eventually utilize the glide mechanics (this is for experienced throwers). During winter season, we usually piece together how to do this whole movement, and then it all comes together during spring season. Feel out your athletes: If they have the capabilities, then they may be able to learn this and throw utilizing the glide during winter season.

The fundamental pattern of the glide has not changed since the 1950s (Fundamentals of Track and Field, Carr, p. 199). Personally, I like to start backward, teaching the mechanics of the standing throw (where the athlete would end their throw) and then incorporating the shuffle/rotary throw and lastly the full glide. Each of these throws require different drills and cueing. (We will get to that.)

I start out by having my throwers feel and get a good grip for the shot put, which will also feel differently when their hands are cold or when they wear gloves. You must have a range of shot puts available: 1.1 pounds, 6 pounds, 8 pounds, 12 pounds, 16 pounds. (High school and college are completely different, so know the rules and requirements.) Each athlete is vastly different as well, and you should choose sizes accordingly, based on strength and capabilities.

The ring size (circle) is smaller and more confined than the discus ring, so you need to make sure your school is aware of that or use a marker for your athletes. Each circle has a toe board (stop board): Make it clear that if the athlete goes over the board, it is considered a foul, and the throw does not count. When practicing, make it a habit that the athlete leaves the circle from the BACK. In competition, if the athlete throws and exits from the front over the board it is a FOUL.

In our CHSAA League, high school boys throw with an 8- to 12-pound shot put, depending on the year. The girls throw with a 6- to 8-pound shot put, also depending on the year. Freshmen and sophomores throw with the lighter shot put; juniors and seniors throw with the heavier shot put. I like to have them get a feel and practice with both—preparedness.

For example, in our first winter track and field meet this past season (which was outdoors), initially the coaches were told the freshman and sophomore boys would throw with the 8-pounder. Well, things changed, and when we got to the meet, we were told right before that only the freshman boys would throw with an 8-pound shot put, and everyone else would use the 12-pounder. Good thing we practiced with it!

Do not let any athletes sit down or stand around in the cold. It will be detrimental to their performance and even worse—contribute to potential injury, says @bpfitcoaching. Share on X

Remember also that point about creating a routine for meet days? Well, since we had our meet outdoors in the cold, our athletes knew the importance of remaining warm. I do not allow them to take off their layers of clothing until right before they throw. Again, mentioning our warm-up, our athletes know what they must do at the meet. Do not let any athletes sit down or stand around in the cold. It will be detrimental to their performance and even worse—contribute to potential injury.

Steps and Drills to Work Toward the Glide

Here is the progression I utilize with my shot put athletes to work toward the glide.

1. Standing Throw

I like to begin here so they understand the basic technique and cueing. You can utilize any tool—a soccer ball, light medicine ball, basketball—whatever you have available. Grip and hold on the shot put is one of the most overlooked coaching cues. The athlete must cradle the shot put with their fingers, palm rotated up and pushing into their neck (right below the chin).

Next, their elbow is up (just above the shoulder), and I explain to the athlete it is a pushing action NOT a throwing action: push up and out. Power and strength are key; the initial movement is facilitated by momentum, applying force into the ground. The sequence follows legs, hips, chest, and finally the throwing arm (Fundamentals of Track and Field, Carr, p. 200).

The athlete begins about a foot away from the toe board, facing the direction of the throw. They cradle the shot put under their chin, flex the back leg, and reach with the other leg into a putting stance, rotating the upper body about 30 degrees and flexing at the hips. Shoulders square, the athlete pushes upward and rotates toward the direction of the throw; the legs extend, and the hips and chest thrust forward. The arm pushes up and out, the opposite arm—which is the blocking arm—acts as a slingshot, before finally snaping the fingers to complete the putting action (Fundamentals of Track and Field, Carr, p. 205).

2. Shuffle and Rotary Throw

Once the athlete understands how to utilize power and the transfer from lower body to upper body, we move on to the shuffle (middle action of the full glide). I actually use a combination of the rotary throw and the shuffle. My goal is to help the athlete understand the middle action of the feet during the glide. The athlete faces the opposite direction of the throw, starting nice and tall, lifts the shot put above their head, and then places it into position. On the way down, they lower their center of mass and get into their putting stance.

The back leg supports the athlete (usually the right leg), and the free leg (usually the left leg) is a foot away from the supporting leg. I teach the athlete to hop and push with the supporting leg, keeping their hips square for as long as possible until it is time to throw, and that left leg now plants as their hips and chest thrust forward powerfully. The throwing arm fully extends, pushing up and out, and they snap their fingers to finish the throw. Again, keep in mind, since we are in the cold, some athletes will choose to use gloves, and this can affect how they release the shot put.

Keep in mind, since we are in the cold, some athletes will choose to use gloves, and this can affect how they release the shot put, says @bpfitcoaching. Share on X

3. Partner Glide and Full Glide

Finally, once they have mastered the basics, it’s time to put it all together and teach the glide! Applying what we learned above, I explain to my throwers this takes time and there must be synchronization of the lower and upper body to create power. Based on my teachings, I had about half of my throwers utilizing the glide mechanics in our first winter meet of the season.

First, I use partner drills with a band, rope, or towels, to help the athlete understand the force production. The athlete holds the opposite end of the equipment and must be LOW. Their shoulders are horizontal and facing directly to the rear; as the athlete glides backward, the partner moves in the same direction. Make sure the athlete’s upper body stays low. For a right-handed athlete (Fundamentals of Track and Field, Carr, p. 207):

1. The left leg makes a low, backward thrust to propel the glide action.
2. The left leg lands offset of where the right foot lands.
3. The right leg extends and makes a STRONG backward push and pulls directly under the body’s center of mass.
4. The right and left leg should perform both actions almost simultaneously. (This is the most challenging part for novice throwers to perform.)

Once they have done their partner drills, then I have the athlete do this action alone. I like to explain to them that all the power comes from the hips: It is an action/reaction, and the amount of force you put into the ground is what you get back. Add speed to that and the shot put will gain distance. Projectile motion includes height, angle, and distance. Pay attention to where the athlete releases the shot:

• Do their hips open too early?
• Do they move slow?
• Do they throw instead of push?
• Is their chest facing down?
• Are they gripping the shot put properly?

I know this is a lot to work through as a coach but imagine being the athlete. Keep it simple, don’t over-cue, and let the athlete feel it out. Make sure they have a game plan and routine for meet days that includes warm-up, mindset, visualization, and what to eat—all of these variables play a huge role in performance.

I know this is a lot to work through as a coach but imagine being the athlete. Keep it simple, don’t over-cue, and let the athlete feel it out, says @bpfitcoaching. Share on X

Training Model

My initial plan heading into this past winter season:

• Throwing days 3x/week (drills, quality throws, technique)
• Lift days 2-3x/week (power and strength training)
• Speed and plyometrics training 3x/week (short sprints, jumping, hopping, skipping)

As I stated earlier, our training model relies on the availability of the weight room, the weather, attendance, and now remote schooling. We have developed a system and model for our warm-up that optimizes performance and enhances the central nervous system. I can’t stress this enough—when it is cold out, your athletes must be warm! Injury prevention is KEY, especially when athletes are more sedentary now than ever.

Example of Training Week:

Warm-up:

Foam roll, mobility, activation, dynamic drills

Monday:

Warm-up and drills with team

Plyometrics (broad jumps, SL hops, bounding)

Lift circuit (3×8):

Part A: Lateral medball toss, elevated push-ups, dynamic lifts

Part B: Iso split squat, pull-ups, shoulder taps, and t spine rotation

Cool down, mobility, and stretch

Tuesday:

Warm-up and drills with team

Standing throws, overhead throws, partner drills (technical work)

Short sprints (4x10m sprints 80%, 4x10m backpedal)

Cool down, mobility, and stretch

Wednesday:

Warm-up and drills with team

Lift circuit (3×6-8):

Part A: SL hops, OH medball slam, lateral bear crawl

Part B: Front or goblet squat, farmer’s carry, reverse plank

Cool down, mobility, and stretch

Thursday:

Warm-up and drills with team

Standing throws, shuffle, and rotary throws (drills)

Short sprints (medball throw to 20m sprint x 5)

Cool down, mobility, and stretch

Friday:

Warm-up and drills with team

1 standing throw, 1 partner glide, and 2 glides (focus as if you were in competition, work on the kinks)

Pre-meet feel

Cool down, mobility, and stretch

Saturday:

Usually Meet Day

K.I.S.S.

As a high school coach, your job is to cater to your athletes, teach them, guide them, and help them grow as athletes and human beings. We are in a new world; a lot feels like it’s happening at random, and here we are having practice and track and field meets in the cold.

Just because you saw a world-class thrower do it, doesn’t mean it is appropriate for your athletes or group. Some reminders I find helpful:

• Utilize video analysis.
• Minimal cueing.
• Keep it simple, stupid.

Visual and kinesthetic learning are the best ways to develop and grow. Do your diligence as a coach and understand the mechanics of the throws and your why for your program, and it will help your athletes develop and optimize in performance.

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

Reference

Carr, Gerry. Fundamentals of Track and Field. Human Kinetics. Second Edition. 1999.

College recruiting can be a daunting and stressful process for high school track and field athletes and their parents. As a former Division I track and field coach that has spent 14 years coaching in the Division I ranks and is now coaching in the private sector, I have come to realize that many athletes, parents, and coaches are not educated enough about the realities of college recruiting when it comes to track and field. Every parent and athlete at the high school level dreams about obtaining a college track and field scholarship, but the realities of obtaining such a scholarship are difficult.

The most important thing to understand is the reason why it is so hard to get a track and field scholarship. There are years’ worth of data, collected by the NCAA and other institutions, that has shown the percentage of high school kids in the country that get a track and field scholarship, at any level, as being less than 6% for men and women. This is an important factor to understand when beginning the recruiting process.

Unfortunately, many think it is quite easy to obtain a full-ride scholarship if the athlete runs fast. However, based on years of data from the NCAA reviewing national letters of intent (NLIs) and looking at the offers that have been given throughout the country, the national average scholarship amount is less than $18,000 a year. This will be different based on each institution and the cost of tuition.

Now that I have provided you with the reality that obtaining a college track and field scholarship is not a simple process, I want to address some myths that a lot of people believe when it comes to the college recruiting process.

Myth #1: I Am Being Recruited

Many athletes feel that they are being recruited or looked at if a college coach sends them a letter or questionnaire in the mail. They post their excitement on social media without understanding that receiving a letter in the mail, asking for basic information, does not mean they are being recruited by that university. In all actuality, coaches are sending out hundreds of letters and questionnaires to kids across the country in order to gather information to create a profile for those athletes that will fit their program’s standards.

It is a numbers game for college coaches because we know that we are going to get more no’s than yes’s and we only have a limited number of scholarships to give out. Let us look at the following stats to further drive the point home:

There are 341 NCAA Division I programs in the country. If we include NCAA Division II and III, plus NAIA and junior colleges, there are a total of 1,272 track and field programs. There are over one million high school athletes that participate in track and field. Among all the college track and field programs, there are only 69,710 student athletes competing in college.

It is a numbers game for college coaches because we know that we are going to get more no’s than yes’s, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

When can you say you are officially being recruited by a college/university? When the college coach talks to you on a consistent basis through phone calls and text messages. As the conversations continue to take place with the college coach and the coach begins making home or school visits, attending your practices, and planning official visit dates, then you can consider yourself as being highly recruited by that program.

Myth 2: Official Visit Offers

One of the preconceived notions that many parents and athletes have going into an official visit is that at the end of the visit there will be an official offer extended to them prior to leaving the campus. Yes, an official offer can be extended at the end of one’s official visit. However, that does not always hold true.

There are many factors at play during an official visit. From the time an official visit begins, the athlete is instantly being assessed on how they carry themselves, how they interact with other people, and the types of questions they ask.

The first factor for why an official offer may not be extended prior to an athlete leaving campus is that college coaches are aware that an athlete most likely will not accept the offer if they have remaining official visits to attend.

The second factor could be that the athlete is not one of the program’s top recruits, but the coach will continue to recruit the athlete in order to see if their top recruits will accept their offer. For that reason, the coaches are going to let the athlete make the other visits and continue having conversations with them as the recruiting process plays out. The reality is if the athlete is not highly ranked on the program’s list, then they will be on the waiting list to determine if the higher ranked recruits will accept their offer.

The third factor is how athletes present the experience on social media while visiting and how they interact. Coaches will be watching to see if the athletes are portraying a positive experience or displaying excitement. How the athlete acts during the experience can determine whether they will receive an offer while on campus. For example, colleges set up things such as college game day during football season for the athlete and their family to go down to the football field. The coaches are having the athletes take pictures with their track uniforms on and having them do mock interviews because they want to see how excited the athlete is about possibly being a part of the program and representing their university.

How the athlete acts during the experience can determine whether they will receive an offer while on campus, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

If college coaches see that an athlete is closed off, keeping to themselves, not engaging with the other recruits, or not excited while on their visit, the coach may be hesitant to extend an offer. Needless to say, the athlete’s actions, body language, and words are constantly being examined by the coaches as those things can determine whether an athlete is 100% excited about the university. While on a visit, I recommend athletes limit the time they are on their phones. It’s important for them to be engaged, attentive, and tuned in.

Many coaches, myself included, will text a prospect they are highly recruiting who is on an official visit to another university and ask them how things are going. College coaches are always recruiting and trying to get a feel for where a prospect stands with their university. Unfortunately, coaches do this because we know that the prospect is most likely going to respond. Therefore, if I am seeing a prospect constantly on their phone, that tells me that they are not fully engaged. It also makes me question if the athlete is possibly talking to another coach while visiting our campus and that maybe they are more interested in another program but are taking this visit because mom and/or dad wanted them to go on the visit.

While on a visit, I recommend athletes limit the time they are on their phones, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

A fourth factor is that many coaches will not extend an offer until they talk to the athletes on the team. Coaches are able to get valuable feedback from their current athletes on what they thought of the prospective athletes while they were socializing with their possible future teammates. Coaches want to see if their athletes think they will be a good fit in their culture. If the athletes report back to their college coaches any negatives, then an offer may not be extended as this feedback can determine if they are one that is going to cause issues within the team dynamics.

All these things taken into consideration can cause a prospect to be moved down the program’s recruiting list. These are only a few factors out of an extensive list that are considered when an athlete is on an official visit. All that to say, an official visit does not 100% guarantee that an athlete will walk away with an offer in their hand.

An official visit does not 100% guarantee that an athlete will walk away with an offer in their hand, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

Myth #3: My Scholarship Cannot Be Taken Away

OK, this is a big one and the one that I felt had to be included in this article. Yes, you have heard many coaches at the club level and high school level say that “your scholarship cannot be taken away based off of your performance or if you get injured.” That is 100% true, for the NCAA rule does state that a college program cannot take away your scholarship based off your performance or if you get injured. So, your scholarship is safe.

Here is the big reality of everything. This must be talked about because so many people feel that once they have their college scholarship, they have obtained everything they have been pursuing since they were young and that this is why their parents spent thousands of dollars on training and traveling to summer track meets. It is the dream to get a college track and field scholarship. Parents are happy and excited that their child’s goal has been achieved and they are relieved that now they do not have to pay as much money for a college education.

But please hear this loud and clear: college track and field is a business. That is the biggest thing that must be understood. It is an amazing opportunity to have a college education paid for so you do not have to pay as much to get a degree. That is a big opportunity and to be a part of a team where you are supported, where you feel you are a part of something special, makes it that much better.

Please hear this loud and clear: college track and field is a business, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

Realize that, for your coaches, this is their job, their livelihood, and what helps them support their families. Understand it is their job when the athletic director goes to the head coach and says there are certain expectations for the program: winning national championships, winning conference titles, maintaining a certain team GPA, and maintaining a certain APR that the NCAA requires. There are so many factors at play, and at the end of the day you must understand that college track and field is a business, so when you accept that college scholarship, you are basically accepting a job.

For the next four years of being a student athlete, your job is to get good grades, be responsible, go to class, and walk with integrity when representing your university as well as your family. With that also comes the responsibility of performing on the track. I always tell people this: it is like getting a regular job at McDonald’s where they are going to give you $15 an hour to serve their customers well, be productive, and meet the standards and goals they have communicated to their employees. They are expecting you to work at certain times of the day and complete daily duties that are required of you while you are employed at McDonald’s.

That example is the very same thing when one is awarded a college track and field scholarship. Your duties are to listen, be engaged, support your teammates, be a team player, and to contribute to the team’s success in the events that you participate. That means scoring at the conference level or maybe even scoring at Nationals depending on the goal of that university. The other thing that is a huge factor that plays into this is not having any issues when it comes to dealing with professors, administrative assistants (like your academic advisors), strength and conditioning coaches, tutors, and teammates.

Therefore, being given a great reward comes with big responsibilities you must fill and uphold. If you are not doing these very fundamental things, the truth is that you can always lose your college scholarship because of your attitude, behavior, and actions. By rendering yourself academically ineligible, they can pull your scholarship and you will not be able to compete. They can take away the scholarship just like firing you from a job. You better believe the coaches are documenting your behavior, your actions, your words, your attendance, your interactions with teammates, and your relationships with your event coach and the head coach.

The truth is that you can always lose your college scholarship because of your attitude, behavior, and actions, says @JustinWickard. Share on X

You have a file with your name on it and if you are a problem for that program, at the end of the year the head coach is going to say, “Hey, you didn’t meet these requirements that were required of you when we gave you this scholarship. You have never scored any points to contribute to the success of the team and we are giving you x amount of money for your college education. Yet the biggest reason we are reducing/not renewing your scholarship is because you’ve been tardy this many times, we’ve had these disciplinary issues with you, we’ve constantly had to talk to you about taking care of your responsibilities, taking care of your body in the athletic training room, or going to your tutors. Therefore, we are not renewing your scholarship or reducing it for the following year.”

If this happens, you will receive a letter in the mail from the compliance office and you will have thirty days to appeal it in front of the NCAA board committee that the university has set up. Understand that if that university has properly documented everything and if a lot of it has to do with your behavior or how you have handled certain things, and if the dates which you were formally addressed by the coach of these ongoing issues were recorded, I promise you from an administrative standpoint that they are going to look at that and they are going to agree with the coach and the appeal will be rejected.

So please remember that because you obtained your college scholarship, from day one when you step foot on campus you have a role and responsibility to uphold. Know that every day is a day that you must prove that you are worthy of keeping that scholarship, or maybe of earning more of that scholarship depending on what kind of offer you received.

Earning a scholarship takes a lot of hard work, but so does keeping one.

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

The best ability is durability. My dad pressed this saying into my head when I was young, and he repeats it all the time. While I thought sprinting fast, jumping high, and expressing power were all superior traits, I tend to agree more and more with his wisdom the older I get and the more I work with athletes. This is especially true for high school basketball players, as many only have a few short seasons to express their athletic potential on the court.

Every year in the United States, anywhere from 100,000 to 250,000 ACL injuries occur, many of these requiring surgery and subsequent therapy, training, and recovery for the athlete to return to their sport or activity.¹ Every year there is more and more research supporting training programs that work on strength, stability, balance, coordination, etc. to help reduce these numbers. These numbers should be dropping with all of this training…so why do these injuries keep happening? Is there something that we are missing with our approach?

Before we address innovative solutions, lets quickly touch on the common themes present in how these ACL tears and re-tears normally occur.²

1. High ground reaction forces. The ability to land from a jump not only allows elite athletes to stay healthy, but to excel at their sport. This transfer of energy allows basketball players to transition from defense to offense quicker, get more rebounds, and recover from pump fakes. Without the proper strength and technique to minimize these forces, injury can occur.
2. Valgus collapse. A second mechanism of injury identified is valgus collapse of the knee during sport. Again, let’s not demonize the position of knee valgus, but rather the ability (or lack thereof) of the athlete to control the knee through various positions. Coaches and non-coaches alike can almost immediately see this collapse in a basketball athlete on television during a replay of an injury.
3. Planted foot (often “flat-footed”). The foot interacting with the ground is the most critical aspect of the human body when it comes to team speed and power sports. This is no different when identifying the mechanisms of ACL injuries. A proprioceptive disconnection between the brain and the foot can lead to compensation patterns up the lower extremity kinetic chain, especially at the knee.
4. Knee near full extension. The final mechanism of injury is the knee, without proper control, approaching full extension in landing. Again, we are always going to talk about these positions not in good and bad terms, but more “in control” vs “out of control.”

Complications for High School Basketball Players

A few common hurdles exist that compound the risk high school basketball players face when training and competing at elite levels. One common area of concern is the volume of jumping a basketball player is exposed to—not only in the course of plyometrics, but on the court through practice, games, and tournaments. A strength coach needs to take this into consideration when programming in-season sessions. Using a 10-meter fly or a max vertical jump test at the beginning of a session can give great information on the readiness (or depletion) of the nervous system. Keep your athletes happy and healthy as you drive towards better performance.

A second hurdle that I firmly believe needs to be addressed in most basketball programs is the amount and type of conditioning used throughout the season. Too often, we see mindless conditioning at the end of practice, either as punishment or to “get them ready for the fourth quarter.” Not only is this a detriment to the athlete’s physical and emotional state, it can also leave them susceptible to injuries. As strength coaches, it is our responsibility to consistently communicate with the sport coach about proper training programs, drills, and philosophies. Remember, the best ability is durability. Keep your athletes happy and healthy.

Too often, we see mindless conditioning at the end of practice, either as punishment or to *get them ready for the fourth quarter,* says @TomBroback. Share on X

Innovative Solutions

1. Emphasis of Single-Leg Strength and Plyometrics

Current rehab practices do a great job of getting athletes comfortable with bilateral strength exercises and jumping exercises. However, jumping is going from two legs to two legs. There can—and, in my opinion, should be—a dramatic increase in the ability to improve single-leg strength and single-leg plyometrics, like hops and bounds. Most athletes are not pushed hard enough to handle higher single-leg loads. But most ACL tears and re-tears happen during single-leg landings, so why would we not want to improve single-leg movement capabilities?

Most ACL tears and re-tears happen during single-leg landings, so why would we not want to improve single-leg movement capabilities? asks @TomBroback. Share on X 

Video 1. Rear-foot elevated split squat.

As for plyometrics, I see another gap in what we can improve! Again, most therapists and coaches do a great job of getting athletes to do sagittal plane jumping, doing box jumps or jumping over hurdles. An improvement would be an increase in hopping (ex. R leg to R leg) and bounding (ex. R leg to L leg) in multiple planes of motions. Sports are played in multi-directional capacities, so we need to train that as well.

Research shows 50% of all types of ACL injuries can be reduced with ACL injury prevention programs.³ This is phenomenal news to us in the sports performance community. In his book, Mike Boyle notes: “A combination of strength training and a properly designed and progressed plyometric program is the best ACL injury prevention program in the world.”⁴

Video 2. Forward and lateral single-leg box hops.

Single-leg strength is a key indicator in how prepared an athlete is for their sport, and for their ability to stay healthy. Most ACL tears happen on one leg, so athletes need to be strong (and confident) in a variety of single-leg positions and movement patterns. Landing skills and deceleration skills are additional factors that need to be incorporated, as good athletes change direction well but also a lot of injuries can occur during these moments of athletic competition.

Recent research additionally shows that up to 70% of ACL injuries are non-contact injuries.⁵ Athletes are typically twisting, turning, planting, or descending from a jump when the injury happens. This is a key indicator into why proper rehab and sports performance training are paramount for keeping athletes as healthy as possible. If we can work on controlling these landing and change-of-direction patterns, we can improve the injury rate of athletes.

2. Barefoot Lifestyle

High school basketball players spend an extraordinary amount of time in basketball shoes and flip flops. Although neither of these are conducive to optimal foot health or performance, I firmly believe one of the lowest hanging fruits for athletes is to get them out of their shoes more often at home. Spending more time barefoot will increase the strength, mobility and—most importantly—the proprioceptive awareness an athlete has with their body in space. You can’t grow a plant in a closet.

Spending more time barefoot will increase the strength, mobility and—most importantly—the proprioceptive awareness an athlete has with their body in space. You can’t grow a plant in a closet, says @TomBroback. Share on X

Now, you don’t necessarily need to do this during training. Being an advocate for athletes to take care of their feet at home will keep them happy and healthy. A large hurdle to this might be athletes that live in colder weather states.

Video 3. Rolling a lacrosse ball underfoot is a simple exercise athletes can do for better foot health, particularly in cold weather states where athletes should spend more time taking care of their feet.

This change in behavior pattern will help with the planted foot mechanism of tear described earlier. The increase in proprioceptive awareness of the foot is only achieved by actually using the foot like it is intended. Additionally, if you truly want your foot to have a healthy relationship interacting with the ground, you need additional education on the benefits of being barefoot more often. This is one of the missing links I believe that needs to be addressed in the quest to decrease ACL injuries, among other lower-extremity dysfunctions.

3. ACL-RSI

An additional resource I think the sports community needs to be aware of is the ACL-RSI. This short questionnaire is an excellent insight to the psychology of an athlete in returning to sport following an ACL surgery and rehab process. This survey was designed to aid in the objective measurements needed to help determine if an athlete is ready to return to sport or not. There is even an app you can use to complete the survey! A few of the questions on the survey include:

1. Are you confident that you can perform at your previous level of sport participation?
2. Are you fearful of re-injuring your knee by playing your sport?
3. Do you feel relaxed about playing your sport?

An athlete can be too far on the spectrum in either direction with this. An athlete that is too confident—yes, that is a thing—might not be fully aware of how well they are doing in rehab and could want to return to sport too early. However, an athlete that is not confident enough will be hesitant in sport, an attribute we all know is challenging to success and healthy play. I give credit to Liz Niemuth, DPT, OCS, for bringing this assessment to my awareness and her expertise in orthopedic rehabilitation for knee injuries.

Better Outcomes on the Court

Single-leg training is a huge key for athletes to recover from ACL injuries and decrease the chances of it occurring. Increasing proprioceptive training, especially with that all-important foot-to-ground contact, is imperative for us to keep athletes happy and healthy. Finally, knowing the psychological readiness of a basketball player trying to get back on the court is paramount for future success and health.

Knowing the psychological readiness of a basketball player trying to get back on the court is paramount for future success and health, says @TomBroback. Share on X

A great thing about this field is we are always improving and learning. A lot of great coaches, therapists, and surgeons are working on this problem. I hope in the next few years, we will have better answers to the question of how we can decrease ACL injury rates in basketball players of all ages. In the meantime, keep your athletes happy and healthy.

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

References

1. Panzarella, M. (2015). ACL Injury 101 [Ebook]. The American Orthopaedic Society For Sports medicine. Retrieved 21 January 2021.

2. Schilaty, N. D., Bates, N. A., Krych, A. J., & Hewett, T. E. (2017). How Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury was averted during Knee Collapse in a NBA Point Guard. Annals of musculoskeletal medicine, 1(1), 008–12.

3. Webster, K. E., & Hewett, T. E. (2018). Meta-analysis of meta-analyses of anterior cruciate ligament injury reduction training programs. Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 36(10), 2696–2708.

4. Boyle, M. (2016). New functional training for sports.

5. Griffin, L. Y., Agel, J., Albohm, M. J., Arendt, E. A., Dick, R. W., Garrett, W. E., Garrick, J. G., Hewett, T. E., Huston, L., Ireland, M. L., Johnson, R. J., Kibler, W. B., Lephart, S., Lewis, J. L., Lindenfeld, T. N., Mandelbaum, B. R., Marchak, P., Teitz, C. C., & Wojtys, E. M. (2000). Noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: risk factors and prevention strategies. The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 8(3), 141–150.

In an effort to continually improve the athleticism of our athletes, we as coaches constantly seek faster playing speeds and ultimately greater maximum velocities. Oftentimes, we use methods such as fly 10s, wickets, and overspeed to improve the quality of maximum velocity. In this article, I want to introduce a different concept for the improvement of maximum velocity: deceleration training.

This may sound counterintuitive at first, but it’s an idea I have begun applying with athletes in both my private sport performance facility and in my role as the head strength and conditioning coach at a local high school.

Prior to implementing this deceleration work to improve maximum velocity, all athletes go through 6-9 weeks of acceleration progressions, 3-5 weeks of band- and sled-resisted sprinting, and 3 weeks of maximum-velocity sprinting. This lead-up can be condensed; however, I want to ensure that we are getting the most out of our athletes’ upright work prior to implementing a new training concept. This also helps us see their true maximum velocity to ensure any increases in maximum velocity from the deceleration training are valid.

Rigidity and the Stance Phase in Max-Velocity Sprinting

Max-velocity work tends to be left for track athletes because too many coaches use the argument that agility-based athletes rarely achieve top speed, so there is no need to train it. (We know this is incorrect.)

We are aware of the importance of deceleration training for agility-based athletes; however, what are the implications for acceleration and max-velocity improvement?

When studying the kinematics of sprinting and maximum-velocity running, one of the key areas to look at is the stance phase. During this period—touchdown to toe-off—two things to consider are the hip height above the ground and the lower limb’s ability to maintain rigidity throughout the stance phase¹. Studies have shown that the most elite sprinters are able to create immediate rigidity through this limb in order to maintain hip height above the ground and limit the time of ground contact.

This information then begs the question: How do we improve rigidity?

Rigidity comes down to the body’s ability to instantaneously fire a specific (or multiple) muscle group(s), then hold the isometric contraction without giving in to external forces. In the case of max-velocity sprinting, much of the external forces will be due to body weight and gravity. If we can help our athletes overcome these factors, then we are one step closer to improving their maximum velocity.

If we can help our athletes overcome body weight and gravity, then we are one step closer to improving their maximum velocity, says @brattainperf. Share on X

As I begin to discuss the sequence of drills later in this article, you will notice that I constantly refer to the importance of the eccentric movement in the drill. An eccentric contraction in the muscle refers to the work the muscle does as it increases in length. As an example, think about grabbing a heavy bag on your counter and straightening your arm to lower it to the ground. The bicep goes through an eccentric contraction. A muscle’s ability to obtain rigidity largely has to do with its ability to control eccentrics so that it does not continue to get longer under the load placed on it.

To help the multisport high school athletes I work with recognize and begin organizing against these external forces, I take them through a series of deceleration drills. These deceleration drills incorporate multiple constraints to yield the desired effects. We constantly work from a state of current strength and success to a state of desired strength and success.

For example, many of the youth athletes (12-14 years of age) we work with have sufficient strength and successful locomotion patterns in upright, low-velocity movements. However, as soon as we alter these positions by either increasing the speed of the movement or decreasing their interaction with the ground (bilateral to unilateral, shortened ground contact), their ability to succeed in the movement decreases.

As we move through the progressions, we constantly seek the position that sacrifices one of their current strengths in order to introduce them to a position of slightly less strength and success to begin to elicit the adaptation. Once completed, the athlete will thrive in both positions and velocities high and low.

Deceleration Training Progression

As mentioned above, we begin each athlete in a position of success prior to implementing foreign positions and movements. Our ultimate goal is to help the athlete control and own every position and movement we introduce before moving to the next step. This deceleration series will manipulate the following factors:

• Ground interaction: bilateral vs. unilateral
• Stance: symmetrical vs. asymmetrical
• Speed: high vs. low velocity

We begin by prescribing an eccentric squat, which places the athlete in a bilateral, symmetrical, low-velocity movement pattern. This is most often a recipe for success. Our athletes tend to recognize this movement and feel comfortable going through it. We start by manipulating the tempo of the eccentrics prior to loading the movement and use the eccentric for 3-8 seconds.

In our deceleration training progression, we start with the eccentric squat. Athletes are familiar with it and feel comfortable executing it. As the athlete performs the eccentric squat, we cue:

• Balance between the heel, first metatarsal, and fifth metatarsal of the foot.
• Tracking knees forward over toes.
• Maintaining tension through posterior hip.
• Upright posture.
• Control through descent.

As we progress through the sequence, we place an emphasis on changing stance prior to adjusting velocities. When velocities increase, athletes often introduce compensatory patterns. By keeping movements slow as we alter the starting position, we are able to observe true control compared to false control.

The second step in the progression is an asymmetrical, bilateral, low-velocity movement. This is an exercise like a split squat, which allows athletes to keep both feet on the ground for increased stability while also reducing the surface area of the foot in contact with the ground. This movement is also performed as an eccentric movement with tempos ranging from 3-8 seconds on the eccentric portion.

The third step in the progression is an asymmetrical, unilateral, low-velocity movement. This could be an eccentric single leg squat or eccentric Bulgarian split squat. Again, the idea is to reduce the amount of interaction with the ground, increasing the athlete’s stability and coordination through the unilateral position while also controlling the speed.

As the athlete moves through the third step of the progression, we cue:

• Balance through the heel, first metatarsal, and fifth metatarsal.
• Control through the limb throughout the descent.

As mentioned in the first step, we manipulate the parameters of the eccentrics prior to adjusting the external load of the movement. Once we have exemplified proficiency in the asymmetrical, unilateral, low-velocity position, it is now time to move to a manipulation of velocities of the movement.

The fourth step of the progression is a symmetrical, bilateral, high-velocity eccentric. This is typically a depth drop in our progression. When athletes perform this drill, we instruct them to step off the initial surface, contact the ground with both feet, and create an immediate deceleration. This means we want very little drop in the squat. The eccentric movement should halt abruptly upon the athlete coming full foot with the ground.

One of the important cues that must also be used throughout the implementation of these drills is the ability to “stick” the landing. Each of the decelerations should end with a “dead stop.” These are not drills where we practice sinking into the final position. Again, the focus here is to improve the ability to maintain rigidity and integrity of the stance leg throughout max-velocity sprinting. In order to do so, we must be prepared and able to create an immediate contraction of one or multiple muscle groups.

An important cue throughout implementation of these deceleration drills is for athletes to ‘stick’ the landing or end with a ‘dead stop,’ says @brattainperf. Share on X

Following the depth drops, we move to an asymmetrical, bilateral, high-velocity movement, such as a split drop. This maintains the velocity of the depth drop while also incorporating the reduced stability of the split position.

During the implementation of the split drop, we continue to reinforce that athletes:

• Balance weight between the front and back foot.
• Keep front foot flat.
• Create an instantaneous stop once both feet are completely in contact with the ground.

Following the split drop, we incorporate single leg drops. These single leg drops are very similar to the split drops except for the fact that athletes land on one leg. This drop variation forces athletes to create stability through one leg while also beginning to better understand the concept of single leg rigidity. This will be the most comparable drill to the sprinting stance phase prior to moving into our sprinting drills.

The focus on the single leg drop, similar to the previous movements, will be:

• Balance between heel, first metatarsal, and fifth metatarsal.
• Abrupt halt of eccentric motion when whole foot comes into contact with the ground.
• Proper loading of hip (i.e., knee over toes with no sign of knee valgus).

Following the drop series, we increase the velocity as we approach the deceleration phase by using run-in decelerations. Again, we use the same categorizations on the deceleration that we used in the previous drills, with the exception that they are now all high velocity. We first begin with a bilateral, symmetrical deceleration. This finish position will look like an athletic position, with the hips lowered, weight evenly distributed, knees over toes, and posture upright.

Following the deceleration to an athletic position, we incorporate a deceleration into a lunge position. This finish position is categorized as bilateral, asymmetrical. This position forces the athlete to quickly organize as they approach the deceleration. Upon entering the last step, shown below, the athlete must come to a whole foot stance on the front leg, maintain an upright posture, and approach a 90-degree position in the front knee.

Some of the mistakes we look for in this drill are athletes taking too much time in the deceleration or not being able to control the deceleration. In order to obtain the most benefit from this series, athletes must approach the position as quickly as possible in order to truly load the system quickly. For this reason, an extended deceleration will take away from the desired goal. The second issue I see is athletes who are unable to control the deceleration. These athletes tend to fall forward in the finish position, or you will see the front heel lift as they shift their weight on the foot to help decelerate.

As we move through this progression, you will see the manipulation of parameters around unilateral/bilateral, symmetrical/asymmetrical, and varied speeds approaching the deceleration. By manipulating these variables, we can not only adjust the finish position, but also create different co-contractions throughout the body to maintain structure throughout the deceleration. For example, the glute medius works significantly harder in a single leg depth drop than it does in a bilateral depth drop. This co-contraction, in tandem with adductors, quads, and hamstrings, is crucial when applied to max-velocity sprinting.

In the upright position of the maximum-velocity sprint stride, these co-contractions will happen at an extremely high rate of speed. In order to be most efficient in this contraction-relaxation process, the body should have exposure to it in a much more controlled environment. The series outlined above allows for this control through the manipulation of the parameters. It should also be noted that the options are endless, and you are, by no means, limited to what I have outlined above.

Making Deceleration Training Work

To begin implementing these drills, the athletes must have some level of understanding of the end goal. As mentioned in the beginning of the article, my high school athletes complete 6-9 weeks of acceleration progressions, 3-5 weeks of resisted sprinting, and 3 weeks of maximum-velocity training before we even implement these drills. We typically begin the acceleration drills on the first day of off-season workouts, which allows us to begin our deceleration drills roughly 6 weeks prior to season. This lets us get through a full phase of deceleration training prior to the start of the season. Again, we then have time to retest maximum velocity prior to the season.

In the last year of implementing this deceleration work with our groups, both in the private facility and in the high school, we have seen improved fly 10 times and 40- and 60-yard sprint times, and an improved hip height above the ground throughout upright running.

By implementing controlled eccentrics, drops and decelerations, we’ve been able to improve our athletes’ integrity and ability to achieve rigidity in their stance leg during upright running. Share on X

Through the implementation of controlled eccentrics, drops, and decelerations, we have been able to improve our athletes’ integrity and ability to achieve rigidity in their stance leg during upright running. Moving forward, we will continue to implement these drills and many others to keep finding ways to overload the system in varying positions in an effort to help improve qualities of power output, rigidity, and ultimately maximum velocity.

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

Reference

1. Bezodis, N.E., Willwacher, S., and Salo, A.I.T. “The Biomechanics of the Track and Field Sprint Start: A Narrative Review.” Sports Medicine. 2019;49(9):1345-1364.

Prepare for the worst and hope for the best. The concept of “worst-case scenario” is the brainchild of some of the most ingenious military experts, and with this idea, Confucius, Lao Tzu, Marcus Aurelius, and many other historical figures armed their troops. The “worst-case scenario” is one of the most commonly used alternative scenarios for performance coaches in rugby.

As a general rule, a worst-case scenario is decided upon by agreeing that a scenario is serious enough to assume the responsibility of representing the worst. However, it is important to recognize that no “worst-case scenario” is truly without the potential for further unpleasant surprises. In other words, a “worst-case scenario” is never guaranteed to be the “worst case,” because situations can arise that no planner can reasonably predict, and a given “worst-case scenario” may only consider the contingencies that may arise in relation to a particular disaster.

For instance, the “worst case” imagined by a seismologist could be a particularly severe earthquake, and the “worst case” imagined by a meteorologist could be a horrendous hurricane. Neither one of them is likely to design a scenario in which a particularly severe storm occurs at the same time as a particularly severe earthquake.

For most people, the worst case is the one that would result in their own death, and the way we define the “worst-case scenario” in sport is evolving. When I was 10 years old, during my endless weekend rugby tournaments, the “worst case” was the absence of sandwiches and steak fries at the refreshment area (a must-have dish for a player of my caliber). Today, as a sport scientist or high-performance practitioner in professional rugby, armed to the teeth with super-powerful technologies—and, more particularly, with GPS—we use data to define the contours of a “worst-case scenario.”

Applying GPS Data to Calculate Worst-Case Scenarios and Design Training

For a long time, GPS analysis of matches in rugby or football only reported average movement data (distance, m/min, high speed distance, etc.) for both halves and then the entire match. While such data is beneficial in profiling the overall requirements of a game, using averages is likely to underestimate peak demand (and therefore worst-case scenarios encountered in the match).

The change in mindset regarding GPS analysis revolves around the assumption that in order to optimally prepare athletes for the demands of competition, it is essential that they are trained to face the most intense periods of the game and not just the average demands. The ability to design training exercises that simultaneously develop physical qualities that meet or exceed the movement requirements of the match would represent an effective and stimulating training environment.

Several methods of calculating the “worst-case scenario” exist. Using smaller fixed periods (10 minutes, for example) provides additional insight into the most demanding passages of play. However, this method was found to be inferior compared to a moving average method for determining high-speed distance (HSD) values ​​during football matches.

In a recent study, using five-minute periods of fixed time (e.g., 0-5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, etc.) and moving averages of the same duration in elite football matches, an overestimation of 31% of HSD distance in fixed time analysis was reported. Likewise, in rugby sevens, a two-minute moving average was used to assess the most demanding phases of the game in terms of relative distance traveled and metabolic power. Others have used relative distance, average number of accelerations/decelerations, and average metabolic power as measures to describe maximum running intensities (for moving average periods of 1 to 10 minutes) during international rugby union matches.

A simple method is:

• Select a period (one minute, two minutes, five minutes, etc.) and analyze the chosen GPS data.
• Focus on the moving average of that data, period after period.
• Apply this method of analysis to a random number of matches.
• Focus on one player at a time or on a group of positions (front rowers, for instance).
• Notice and write down for which period the values ​​of the analyzed data are the highest for each player or group of positions.

Voila!—you now have a “worst-case scenario.” In fact, the above description reflects a simplistic version of the calculation of a “worst case” in rugby (each club has its own recipe, with more or fewer ingredients).

But the real problem is not there—not in the details of a calculation and not in the intricacies of statistical thinking.

The problem is in the very conception of the “worst-case scenario.” A scenario is, by definition, imagined. It represents anticipation. A scenario has alternatives; it is malleable and agile. Identifying the most intense game passages and using this data to guide training content to ensure that players are exposed to the maximum intensities of their sport has nothing in common with the idea of scenario. It is a work of analysis, requiring a certain scientific rigor, far from the fantasy and the cunning required to establish a scenario. Identifying and knowing how to wisely use data sets related to the most intense parts of a match is a prerequisite for programming a physical preparation plan, as is knowing the rules of the game, the calendar of competitions, etc. In short, this is to do your homework and know thy terrain.

Building a worst-case scenario involves looking for uncomfortable situations, pressing where it hurts, making the unthinkable painfully palpable. Share on X

Building a worst-case scenario is quite another thing. It is looking for uncomfortable situations, pressing where it hurts, making the unthinkable painfully palpable. Go flirting with something new, almost inconceivable—this is not an attempt to copy/paste a pre-defined data set to a game situation.

Thinking that a worst-case scenario is the equivalent of a reproduction of data associated with passages of game action identified as “the most intense” should be called into question.

First, there are so many parameters to take into account when we want to define and measure what is the most extreme physiological and psychological demand placed on an athlete in the context of their sport. How can coaches be absolutely certain that what we consider to be the most intense parts of the game are really the most intense parts of the game? Frequently, the yardage per minute is used to define a “worst case.” The latter is, however, a simple density marker that some people take for an intensity marker.

A Ferrari and a Renault Clio can both be flashed at 150 km/hour. This does not mean that they are of equal power, nor that they consume the same amount of fuel. Observing that a player travels at 150 meters/minute over a period of two minutes does not provide any information on the energetic, mechanical, and psychological cost of those two minutes for the player in question.

Another favorite marker—high-speed distance—comes up against a problem of dependence on the maximum speed of the individual. Recording a value of 201 meters above 5 m/s (20 km/h) for player A over a period of two minutes does not provide any information on the intensity of this passage of play, except if related to the percentage of maximum speed that 5 m/s represents for that player, and if we consider the real speed variation during this period.

Let’s consider the following situation: Simon is one of your players. His max speed is estimated at just above 9 m/s. Twice this year you recorded passages of plays where he realized a high of 201 meters of high-speed running distance (above 5 m/s) over a two-minute period (as part of your rolling average analysis). Now, if you were to look into those two-minute periods with a microscope and look at each change of speed as a new bout, this is what you may find:

In the first instance, the 201 meters above 5 m/s over a period of two minutes comes with nearly 20% of the time spent at over 90% of maximum speed, as well as a sprint distance of 127 meters. The recorded activity would therefore correspond to three substantial sprints interspersed with periods of lower activity.

In the second instance, the 201 meters above 5 m/s over a period of two minutes are characterized by 0% of the time spent above 90% of the maximum speed and no sprinting, but almost 25% time spent at 70% of maximum speed and 75% of time spent at a standstill. The above activity would be categorized as intermittent.

No strength and conditioning coaches would argue that these two activities have the same physiological and psychological impact.

Dynamic Feedback, Nonlinear Amplification, and Turbulence

Defining the most intense game passages requires an individualized approach. For each individual athlete, a number of factors should be combined to determine the characteristics of an intense passage of play:

• Specific position requirements.
• Innate preferences and acquired skill.
• Archetype and psychological profile.

If there are 15 players on the field (in your team) and as many different profiles, it is possible—but difficult—to define the spectrum of the most intense passages of play. On the other hand, it is almost impossible for your 15 players to experience their individual version of an intense passage of play simultaneously over a period of one, two, or even five minutes. Using this data to inform a suitable training program is consistent, but using it in an attempt to construct a common “worst-case scenario” is illusory.

Confusing the identification of the most intense passage of plays of a game and the “worst-case scenario” in rugby or other team sports testifies to an altered conception of the laws governing this type of activity.

A rugby match is a confrontation of two complex systems (two teams), characterized by the successive alternation of order and disorder, stability and instability, uniformity and variety. A rugby match is nonlinear, unpredictable. In chaos, prediction is not possible because nothing obeys a set of predefined rules. Can we define what will be the worst part of an event that we cannot predict with precision?

In chaos, prediction is not possible because nothing obeys a set of predefined rules. Can we define what will be the worst part of an event that we cannot predict with precision? Share on X

Like the radar flashing for just an instant on the long road traveled by the driver, isolating a row of data over a predefined period gives a frozen image. A decontextualized and cold understanding. Extrapolating a concept of “worst-case scenario” from a data extract makes no sense. It’s all about the dynamic aspect, the sequencing, the accumulation. The physiological and psychological states of the player at the instant of the passage of play identified as “worst case” are only transient, and only exist because they are caught in a chain of events and reactions.

A rugby match is governed by certain principles and building a “worst-case scenario” must obey these principles.

1. Dynamic feedback. From the kick-off, every action, every pass, every tackle, and every point scored affects the next action as well as the behavior of teams and individual players. When it is isolated, a relatively simple action—such as a penalty in front of the posts—is technically the same in appearance, whether it takes place at the start or at the end of the match. But, depending on the score and the time remaining, it is perceived as having a different importance. The goal scorer’s heart rate and players’ cortisol levels will be different.

Let’s say, then, the “worst-case scenario” for this team is estimated using the number of accelerations over a two-minute period as a marker. If these two intense minutes are produced during the last two minutes of a game, where the gap on the scoreboard is one point, or somewhere in the first quarter of an hour of the game, is the real physiological and psychological cost the same? For a certain amount of measured locomotor activity, the associated physiological demand is not a fixed reality. The context in which this activity is carried out greatly impacts its “cost” for the system.

2. Nonlinear amplification. Situated in Australia, the team I worked for lost in the NRL semifinals when they were hot favorites. A few minutes after the kick-off, a player from my team, one of the best wingers in the competition, sent a pass straight into the arms of an opponent 20 meters from our in-goal. The latter spun laughing between the posts and opened the scoring.

The negative psychological impact on our team and the galvanizing effect on the opposing team were considerable. Six points is an easily surmountable deficit in rugby league, but falling from favorite to amateur status in the space of a second—and because of an unimaginable blunder—was fatal. Regardless of the intensity of the races or our domination in the collisions, the loss of confidence from the start of the match got the better of physical capacity and technical quality when it came to defeating a “worst-case scenario.”

3. Turbulence. In a game, as in life, there is an interconnection between different events that act on each other. Two events, hypothetically impacted by the same conditions and occurring at the same time, may have a completely different course and end due to the turbulence of another. In a rugby match, if a team loses its best player through injury and concedes a try in the process, it can become a major obstacle. Taken in isolation, each of these events is surmountable—the whole team is prepared to face this type of adversity. In contrast, the cumulative effect makes these games’ moments much more critical.

The same is true when studying GPS data used to define a “worst-case scenario.” It’s simple to prepare players to sustain a given yardage per minute or number of accelerations for a preset amount of time. But what if we add collisions to that? And if any rugby player is able to move at a high pace while suffering collisions, what if you add harsh weather conditions? A succession of questionable arbitration decisions? A period outnumbered? Exposing players to a particular difficulty such as playing at a certain yardage per minute, or wetting the balloons to make them slippery, does not guarantee an improvement in performance when faced with an accumulation of difficulties.

Exposing players to a particular difficulty…does not guarantee an improvement in performance when faced with an accumulation of difficulties. Share on X

A combination of events also has an impact on the energy level. When identifying an “intense passage of plays,” it is necessary to place it in a dynamic context. Players never participate in these most intense passages of plays free of any energetic and psychological baggage—the physiological and psychological states of the player at the time they experience this most intense phase of plays is a determining factor in their ability to produce the expected performance and the impact of this physical demand on their attitude during the minutes that will follow.

High-Intensity Game Moments ≠ The Worst Case

When discussing worst-case scenarios for the purposes of training, many actually describe “the most intense part of the game—or passage of plays.” The difference, however, is notable. The latter is a capture, a temperature measurement, a clue. It is quantifiable, reproducible. It is based on a common language: data.

Once the most intense passage of plays has been identified, the data values ​characterizing them can be used for training programming. Not to be foolishly reproduced identically at all costs, but to inform training loads and delimit what are the requirements for each position to target during specific physical work. The true worst-case scenario, on the other hand, is an emotion, a chaotic spectacle, a surprise. It is constantly varied, subjective. It is based on individual feeling. A “worst-case scenario” is a micro-dose of concentrated adrenaline given to a team when it needs to be tightened. When it needs to evolve.

Confusing these two tools gives rise to popular nonsense today. Obsessed with this little bit of a match that they wrongly call “worst-case scenario,” a fashionable performance coach can produce—without realizing it—aberrant training strategies.

For example, armed with data they believe defines a worst-case scenario, they impose game sequences of a predetermined duration. They assure everyone who listens that it is essential to work on the “worst-case scenario” with the ball, as in a match! But the outcome of the period of plays they impose does not matter to them. That the ball is on the ground, that the technical and tactical aspects of the game are suddenly seen as secondary, this does not disturb them. In order to stage their “worst-case scenario,” they also define an effort: a recovery ratio that they reproduce many times to achieve the desired amount of “worst-case scenario.” However, they are well aware that the sport for which they prepare their players in no way obeys a constant effort:rest ratio.

In any team sport, even to some extent American football, periods of continuous plays alternate with breaks of unpredictable, constantly changing durations entirely determined by the evolving context of the game. By standardizing an effort:recovery ratio, the strength and conditioning coach deprives the worst-case scenario of an essential energetic aspect: metabolic flexibility.

More than ever in control of their ship, the physical trainer who confuses GPS data and an actual worst-case scenario is ready to make many sacrifices to reproduce their expectations. Having become biased, they allow the type of data recorded to influence the way in which the game is played in the context of their “worst-case scenario.” So, while they’re looking for high meters per minute values, they limit the confrontation that hinders the multiplication of player movements.

If, on the other hand, it is the number of collisions that interests them, they offer a reduced field of play. In the name of their worst-case scenario, they defy the rules of the sport and are prepared to compromise the only constant guarantees beyond which the match is never played (proportion of playing field, number of players). They come to feel a certain disdain for the identity of their team, for the strategy advocated by the head coach, and even for the strengths on which the success of the collective rests.

For a rugby team, if the strength and conditioning coach aspires to build up high-intensity distance in their worst-case scenario exercise, they will encourage airy play, space-seeking, support runs. They will take turns throwing balloons into the deep field if necessary. And yet, many times this type of work will be present within teams that, at the weekend, will pride themselves on being present in the physical challenge and will focus their game strategy around their forwards and conquest, far from all the crazy races and open space plays that populated the so-called “worst-case scenario” of midweek training.

Basic Elements of a True Worst-Case Scenario

Creating a worst-case scenario is possible. It is available to any strength and conditioning professional who knows the activity for which they are preparing players. There are only three simple rules that frame the principle of worst-case scenario:

1. It must contain an element of surprise. A situation experienced many times before can no longer be the worst possible situation—when the player knows every detail of the scenario that awaits them, they adapt. They use strategy. They repeat the movements and becomes more efficient. With each new exposure to this situation, the difficulty is reduced. It becomes more and more common and consequently less and less extreme.

To face a worst-case scenario is to respond to an extreme and new situation, which requires that we find exceptional physical and mental resources and mobilize them at the appropriate moment. When this scenario is routine, when it loses its unpredictability, it no longer allows one to search deep within oneself for as-yet-unexplored capacities.

2. It only exists within a defined framework. It must respect a certain level of specificity and be contained within the range of possibilities of the activity practiced. For a firefighter, a “worst case” cannot be a rescue in the depths of the ocean. This is just not their area of ​​practice. And although such an experience can be of great benefit to their psychological resilience, in the course of their career they will never face an adversity requiring the mobilization of physical and mental resources similar to those of a diver-rescuer in deep water.

In sports, the fundamental rules and conditions for the practice of the game itself must be observed. For rugby players, for example, asking them to run a marathon does not confront them with the “worst” of their activity. Distorting the activity practiced in order to make it artificially more demanding in terms of the expression of a particular physical quality does not serve the objective of a “worst-case scenario.”

Producing an unusual physiological and psychological demand through a modification or omission of a fundamental rule certainly has its place in physical preparation, but it does not constitute a “worst-case scenario.” Making a “touch” instead of a tackle in rugby practice—thereby limiting collisions—is a simple and effective way to generate increased running demand. While perfect for aerobic development, if your players start touching opponents instead of tackling them on match day, you won’t be so proud.

For a 100m runner, a “worst-case scenario” is not a 200m or a 400m: it’s a 100m against the wind, with a shoe that breaks. For a rugby player, a “worst-case scenario” is not an Australian football game nor touch rugby. It’s a rugby match with a hostile crowd, a numerical inferiority, a technically catastrophic start to the match.

3. The worst-case scenario must respect the principles mentioned earlier that are verifiable in all team sports and are the guarantors of suspense: the dynamics of interactions between teams and the physical and psychological difficulty of a match. In a situation of setting up a worst-case scenario, the principle of dynamic feedback requires special attention. Players don’t like running in vain, let alone when it’s supposedly “integrated physical preparation.” As competitors, they are used to influencing the course of action through their initiative and decision-making.

A “worst-case scenario” in rugby where the strength and conditioning coach is concerned solely with the amount of movement, and swings balls in all directions as soon as the game is slowed down, goes against this principle. In this example, the player has no way of responding to the situation using dynamic feedback. If they decide to press defensively and dominates their opponent in the collision, play may stop, and a ball may be given to the opposing team in the deep field. If they miss a tackle and the opponent spins alone toward the try line, play may stop, and they may be offered a ball. As the current scenario is in no way influenced by the individual and collective choices of the players, it will not be associated with the match experience of the latter.

A judicious worst-case scenario addresses the principle of nonlinear amplification. It presses where it hurts. A simple example? In the weekly training opposition, take one or two clear starters and get them out of the match group. Give their bibs to two players who have rarely been to first team games.

A judicious worst-case scenario addresses the principle of nonlinear amplification. It presses where it hurts. Share on X

Do not tell any player your reasons. Watch the panic in the looks players silently throw at each other. Communication becomes difficult, unusual mistakes multiply. Doubt appears in their minds. Change some players’ positions, move training to a hostile and unfamiliar place, change the schedule and call the team very early in the morning or late at night…there are many options to test the ability to adapt to the unexpected and create an exacerbated experience of the principle of nonlinear amplification.

Turbulence (A Slight Return)

What about the principle of turbulence? Don’t let it escape your “worst-case scenario” situation! Go get that straw that might break the camel’s back: an opposition to training, where the physical trainer becomes a more-than-biased referee, awarding penalty after penalty to one team, and litigiously condemning the other. If, in addition, the victim of this manipulation is outnumbered, or if players are forced to wear two jerseys one on top of the other when their opponents are lounging in the comfort of their training t-shirts, then the accumulation of adversity will reveal the character of this group of players.

The vast majority of strength and conditioning coaches understand the relationship among training load, fatigue, and coping. However, under the influence of pseudo-scientific papers and a fear of appearing incompetent in the eyes of their colleagues, many persist in accommodating several sequences of “the most intense passage of plays” (or “worst-case scenarios”) in a session, always the same and week after week. The same conscientious professionals who study in great detail how to solicit the lower limbs in bodybuilding without creating significant residual fatigue punish their troops with long minutes of so-called “worst-case scenario” on a weekly basis.

Each team is at its own stage of development, and physical preparation needs vary. Working out at near maximum intensity in small doses during a typical week of training is usually a strategy that pays off in the long run. Using a “worst-case scenario” here and there during a season is the key to maintaining a competitive and resilient team. However, in sports where games take place every weekend, once the competition phase has started, the relevance of a weekly physical and psychological stress such as the one imposed by a “most intense passage of plays sequence” or “worst case-scenario” is questionable.

Using a ‘worst-case scenario’ here and there during a season is key to maintaining a competitive and resilient team. Share on X

There is no such thing as an easy match, and each week the previous meeting leaves traces that are still noticeable when the next opponents knock at the door. Players, like any other individuals, do not have endless resources. At any time in a week of classic preparation, technical, strategic, and physical needs compete for the players’ physiological, emotional, and psychological resources. Deciding to tap into their reserves by exposing them to the physically exhausting “worst-case scenario” has an irrevocable impact on the ability to assimilate the strategic directives given by coaches and improve technical skills. Spending time and energy each week to accustom players to the physical demands of “the most intense parts of the game” is a high-risk and low-return sort of investment.

The (Best-Case) Alternative

Week after week, the “most intense passage of plays” or “worst-case scenario” work sacrifices an opportunity to devote more resources to technical and strategic development. To think, for a single second, that inferiority or superiority in the area of ​​physical ability when exposed to a stint of ultra-intense plays is synonymous with defeat or victory is indicative of a misunderstanding of cause-effect relationships. Recent studies in NRL show that the best teams have a lower physical work output than the worst teams…Yet, when only the GPS data is taken into account, the teams with the highest numbers are also the lowest ranked.

By putting things in context, it becomes evident that a huge energy expenditure is often the mark of teams that lack control. High-intensity distance is easy to accumulate when chasing opponents who seem intractable. The meters per minute skyrocket when spending your time defending.

What strikes me today is that no one seems comparably interested in the idea of ​​best-case scenario. Yet anyone who did their homework in cognitive theory knows that the acquisition and development of motor skills is compromised the moment fatigue sets in. If you spend the majority of your time training your players at very high intensity, you will inexorably compromise their motor control and the quality of their technical skills.

After running a 400m as if it was an Olympic final, who will score the most penalties in football—an experienced player or a novice? Easy. Now, if the experienced player exhausts themselves at top speed over 400 meters right before their attempts (and does this daily), while the novice perfects their ball hitting with freshness, the gap will quickly narrow.

Contrary to what seems to be the dominant theory—that getting used to extreme conditions is the key to being successful when these conditions arise—I am among those who believe that it’s the level of mastery of the technical gesture and motor skill that determines performance when conditions are extreme. If your mastery of the pass in rugby is excellent, for example, increased variability of your motor pattern induced by fatigue resulting from a “most intense passage of plays” will not diminish the quality of your gesture so much as to put your team at risk.

I am among those who believe that it’s the level of mastery of the technical gesture and motor skill that determines performance when conditions are extreme. Share on X

On the other hand, if you do not fully master this technical gesture, if your attempts are generally variable, then the effect of fatigue will be catastrophic on the achievement of this motor skill. And, as mentioned, we do not develop perfect control of an action if we practice it mostly in a state of fatigue, with disturbed motor control and memory thwarted by too pronounced of a sympathetic activation.

The “worst-case scenario” and the “most intense passage of plays” are the domain of the weekend: the match itself. The unpredictable; the inevitable. Players will respond to it in empirical, surprising, sometimes exciting, and sometimes disappointing ways, guided by experience and instinct. The truth of the matter is that you only learn from what you have suffered. Sometimes it’s true, you have to bring these approaches into training to get over it, but it’s still an extra.

The “best-case scenario”—the “normal passage of plays”—is the permanent domain of training. Practice with awareness, do things well, adapt, and don’t react. Weightlifters have been saying it for a long time: “Slow is smooth and smooth is fast.” In other words, practicing perfection allows for self-realization, and self-realization generates intensity.

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

Whitehead, S., Till, K., Weaving, D., and Jones, B. “The Use of Microtechnology to Quantify the Peak Match Demands of the Football Codes: A Systematic Review.” Sports Medicine. 2018;48:2549-2575.

Woods, C.T., Sinclair, W., and Robertson, S. “Explaining match outcome and ladder position in the National Rugby League using team performance indicators.” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2017;20(12):1107-1111.

Game Changer. F. Connolly, 2017.

 

 

As you start your S&C career, you’ll work with many different amateur teams and athletes and will be exposed to what is deemed best practice. This can often be grueling, army-style workouts in the name of mental toughness, “penalty boxes” for athletes who make mistakes during training—where you as the strength coach are designated the punisher—or the constant search for perfection in training.

Unfortunately, this is prevalent at both the amateur and professional levels, so the level of competition doesn’t seem to affect this military-style approach. These are a collection of my thoughts from the past several years, when I originally noted these points down. Surprisingly, they all link together.

Mental Toughness Is Not What You Think

War analogies, army boot camps, “hell week”—as S&C coaches, we are all likely familiar with some form of military influence on the sports teams we’ve worked to train. These elements are generally used in the name of developing “mental toughness” or to see which athletes are “mentally tough.”

But what is mental toughness? Even in the wake of college football “miscalculations” (such as hospitalizations from endless push-ups and burpees, not letting players drink water during heat waves, and in some cases, even athlete deaths), toughness or mental toughness is still a term many coaches use to describe their coaching programs.

Joel Jamieson gives one of the best explanations of mental toughness and why some players don’t “show” it on the field while being driven through mindless, mental toughness sessions:  

“It comes down to how much the brain values the work being done.”

Or, “It’s about the prediction of the reward.”

If the athlete doesn’t see the benefit in that particular task, why would they give the extra effort? Sure, you want to see athletes put 100% into everything they do—but when training doesn’t serve a purpose to make the athlete better at their sport, it doesn’t stimulate them to a great extent. Especially the ones who understand that 3 a.m. wakeups and then running 10 kilometers while holding tires isn’t beneficial to their sport performance.

James Steel has some great thoughts on mental toughness, echoing a sentiment similar to Joel.

“It didn’t take me too long to realize that you could be a teacher and offer constructive criticism and the player responds better to that than making them exhausted and mentally torturing them.”

“If you think that 6 weeks of running at 5 am and making them puke and belittling them in front of their peers takes the place of 18 years of life and lessons that made them who they are as a man today, you have a screw loose.”

Coaching is teaching. When the athlete understands the WHY behind the exercise or program, pushing through something difficult has a purpose. And that purpose is what will drive the athlete to give their best.

Mental Toughness Is a Myth

The way mental toughness is portrayed by coaches in sport is a myth. Mental toughness is seen as obedience or doing anything the coach says, regardless of the outcome. It involves an athlete not stopping during a mindless punishment drill, or those players who relish “hard conditioning.” In my opinion, it doesn’t exist.

The way mental toughness is portrayed by coaches in sport is a myth. Mental toughness is seen as obedience or doing anything the coach says, regardless of the outcome, says @jdelacey01. Share on X

James Smith of Global Sport Concepts explains this myth of mental toughness well with this analogy: A Navy Seal and the CEO of a large company are both considered mentally tough, but if one were to do the other person’s job (most likely poorly), would they now be considered as failing to possess the mental toughness they displayed in their profession?

The simple answer is they are not prepared for the rigors of the other profession.

In essence, mental toughness could be rephrased as “Are you prepared?” Preparation covers every aspect that will relate to your game performance.

And that comes down to teaching or coaching. Physically, this means preparing athletes to sustain the highest outputs over the length of a match, not “lactic baths” of unrelated exercises with no water breaks.

Technically and tactically, that means having a large toolbox of skills the athlete can pull from to solve the problem that is in front of them accurately and quickly. What is often viewed as mental toughness during a match is the athlete making the right decision quickly, under pressure, at crucial times.

Some athletes may possess many of these qualities but lack the ability to show it in competition. A lack of knowledge and application of mental skills can be a factor here. I’ve known players who were fully prepared physically, technically, and tactically, but on competition day, their legs went out from under them.

While outside of the scope of this article, mental skills such as controlling arousal level, visualization, and pre-match routines are all something that can help an athlete rise to their full potential during match play.

By exposing players to many different scenarios during training, we can help prepare them for what they see in front of them during competition. You know how to stifle this development? By using exercise as punishment and creating robotic athletes.

Why Exercise-Based Punishment Is Stupid

If you have Netflix, I would recommend watching Brené Brown: The Call to Courage. You may wonder, what does this have to do with the sport or coaching?

Brené Brown states that creativity and innovation need a vulnerable culture where you are allowed to fail.

“No vulnerability, no creativity.”

“If you’re not willing to fail, you can’t innovate.”

“If you’re not willing to build a vulnerable culture, you can’t create.”

How does this translate to sport? It means creating the right environment for the athletes to play and express themselves without the repercussions of perceived failure (penalty boxes, extra running for dropped balls, etc.). Courage cannot happen without vulnerability.

“Vulnerability = uncertainty, risk, emotional exposure.” 

Taking the risk of failure for something that might pay off for the team in front of thousands of fans, management, and potential future employers shows huge vulnerability and courage. Courage is measured by the amount of uncertainty in the outcome.

And in sport, it is also likely measured by the risk and emotional exposure that may occur, positive or negative. For those reasons, a creative play with two minutes left on the clock to try to win the game is seen as more courageous than the identical play performed two minutes into the game.

Courage is measured by the amount of uncertainty in the outcome. And in sport, it is also likely measured by the risk and emotional exposure that may occur, positive or negative, says @jdelacey01. Share on X

Coaches use the “penalty box,” or make athletes run the number of laps on Monday by the score difference the squad lost by, because they think it will deter the players from making mistakes and push them to win matches. I’ve yet to hear a player say they need to win so they don’t have to run laps on Monday.

While much of this is starting to encroach on sport coaching, I believe the gap between S&C and sport coaching is slowly closing. In most sports, the S&C coach must have strong knowledge about the technical/tactical aspects of the sport; especially when it comes down to interpreting stats such as GPS data. Physicality and physiology aren’t strong differentiators at the elite level in most mixed sports.

For pure endurance sports, while technical elements are still important, physiology is a strong predictor of performance. In mixed sports, technical prowess and tactical awareness are what separate individuals and teams.

Which brings me to my next point.

Athletes Are Not Robots

In their podcast episode together, Steve Magness and Jon Marcus encapsulate what sport and training really are, and that’s art. While directed at track athletes, there are numerous takeaways in the discussion for other sports.

Magness and Marcus talk about how, as coaches, we have this love affair with the idea of “mathematical exactitude”; meaning, if an athlete hits “x” time for a certain run during a training session, it will translate to “x” race time on competition day. The issue they raise with this is:

“Why are we creating painters in practice, when we should be cultivating artists? Competition is a work of art.”

The painter and the artist analogy is drawn from Charles and Jackson Pollock.

“Everyone’s heard of Jackson Pollock because he was an artist. He took risks. He did something wildly different and a lot of his stuff failed and did not work but some of his stuff did work and it was so new and innovative that people took note. Charles Pollock was taught how to classically paint. He was taught by a master. This is the style. These are the constraints. You need balance. You need this. You need these types of tones etc. All he did in his career was paint portraits. It wasn’t art because there was no risk.”

“The problem with the painter is that they have their whole race planned down to the split times. If they don’t hit that split time, the story they tell themselves is self-destructive. They are thinking more about the clock than the actual race. Then they miss the opportunity to make art.”

The same can be said for team sports that are stuck in a rigid tactical structure. Regardless of what happens in front of them, they need to play the coach’s game plan—otherwise, they face repercussions.

When we create a perfectionist culture within our sporting teams, are we really doing our best for the athletes? For example, planning out the exact structure and moves the team must play during a match or only using drills that allow for perfect movement.

But what happens if that’s not working?

In a perfectionist culture, the team loses playing the same structure and strategy, as no player wants to be seen as a failure by the coach for playing “outside of the game plan.” As Christian Thibaudeau stated on the Just Fly Performance podcast, athletes who display this kind of behavior (playing outside of the set game plan through creativity that works better) are seen as non-coachable because they’ve now found something that works, so they don’t listen to their coaches.

As Paddy Upton, previous Head Coach of the Sydney Thunder Big Bash T20 Cricket team states: “In sports teams, people don’t actually have a fear of failure as much as they have a fear of repercussion from the failure, whether it is from the media, from the coach, from the fans. When coaches reprimand, shout, gesticulate when somebody makes a mistake, when a captain gesticulates on a field at someone who misfields or drops a catch, the player then becomes terrified to make that same mistake. And when you have become scared of making the same mistake, you actually put yourself in a [state of] physical readiness to make that mistake.”

Give Your Athletes a Blank Canvas

To allow athletes to be creative on the field, to come up with solutions and problem-solve on the fly during a high-pressure match, they must have the blank canvas to create their own art. Or a vulnerable environment that allows them to show courage through being creative and innovative, manipulating what is going on in front of them to try what they think will work.

Perfectionism does nothing but stifle creativity—no creativity equals a one-dimensional sports team, which play in a predictable nature that creates robots rather than athletes, says @jdelacey01. Share on X

Perfectionism does nothing but stifle creativity—no creativity equals a one-dimensional sports team, which play in a predictable nature that creates robots rather than athletes.

Let your athletes be artists. Let them play. Race each other rather than the clock. Create fun competition in training. Create challenges they have to figure out their own solutions for. Provide a canvas for athletes to create art, not a set of rules.

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

Standing next to the finish line at Mt Tahoma High School, watching the boys 4A 1600m, I knew I was watching something special…but didn’t know just how special it was. This race passed all the eyeball tests: some of the best distance runners in the country getting out hard in the first lap, gracefully floating through the middle of the race, and then powering to a photo finish that left no one in the stands in their seat.

The result? The two fastest times that year in the country.

So, how did that happen? How did those two runners run sub 4:07 for 1600m with two other competitors at 4:10 or better? Assessing that race, those top finishers each took their places at the starting line possessing all four pillars necessary to hold up the house of distance running.

1. Aerobic Conditioning

When the term “aerobic conditioning” is mentioned, miles and miles of running immediately come to mind—but that is only one aspect of aerobic conditioning.

I like to compare aerobic conditioning to communication—when communicating, you are attempting to get information or a message from a sender to a receiver through a medium or channel. Without any one of those aspects, the message does not travel. In aerobic conditioning, you are attempting to move oxygen from a sender to a receiver through a medium. The sending is done by your heart and lungs, and to maximize the those organs’ abilities to transmit oxygen, you need to develop more capillaries—which are built up by the body when an athlete performs an aerobic function for longer than 60 minutes (but are more effective for lengths of effort longer than 75 minutes).

That takes care of sending, but what is the receiver? And, how is the ability to receive maximized?

The receiver is the muscles, and we increase the muscles’ ability to take on oxygen by training at or close to the velocity at which the maximum volume of oxygen can be moved, or vVO2max. vVO2max training is done as repeats in bouts of 90 seconds to about five minutes with a rest interval that is approximately equal to the duration of vVO2max effort.

Last is the medium in which the oxygen travels. Well, we all know that oxygen is carried in red blood cells through arteries to the muscles, except for the veins, which carry oxygenated blood from the alveoli of the lungs back to the heart. So how is that process improved?

1. Being able to move in the most efficient manner possible.
2. Getting rid of the excess hydrogen ions in the blood that is broken down from lactic acid buildup due to burning glycogen without oxygen with higher-intensity running.

Efficient running (or running economy) is developed and improved by a combination of the next three pillars. Your body’s ability to get rid of hydrogen ions is developed by training at a velocity equal to about 80% to 90% of an athlete’s vVO2max. That is done by what is known as tempo running (which is closer to the 80% area), lactate threshold or cruise intervals (done at about 85%), and critical velocity, which is 90% to 91% and also has a vVO2max improvement component.

2. Speed or Anaerobic Condition

The next pillar of distance running is speed or anaerobic condition (which by definition means “without oxygen”). With regard to the high school cross country distance of 5k, science tells us that anaerobic use of fuel comprises about 7% of an athlete’s effort. That is where many coaches come up short in their application of anaerobic training.

That’s not to say that speed is the only thing it takes to make a distance runner. On that thought, in 1987, Bob Kennedy won the Kinney (now Footlocker) National Cross Country Championship. A year later, as a true freshman at Indiana, he won the NCAA National Cross Country Championship. He was the first native-born American to break 13 minutes in the 5,000-meter event and never ran more than 35 miles a week in high school—and, after that, about 45 miles a week as a pro with mostly speed work as a staple of his training.

High school coaches all over the U.S. got a hold of that information and created maybe the worst decade in American high school distance running in history. Running a 3200m in under nine minutes was rare in the 1990s. Where are we at now? At the last Arcadia Invitational, 14 runners finished faster than nine minutes in one meet. So, where does that leave us with speed? More than just training your body to use a fuel source without the use of oxygen, anaerobic speed training has several other functions.

First, running fast is a skill that utilizes a combination of strength, reactiveness, and coordination, all of which must work in unison to perform effectively. That skill is no different than hitting a baseball, throwing a football, or even shooting a basketball. If an athlete in any of those sports spends time not practicing those functions, they lose muscle memory for that skill. It is for that reason that speed work must be a part of a distance runner’s training, year-round.

The more comfortable a distance runner is at running fast, the easier it feels to run at an aerobic race pace and the more economical the athlete performs the function of running. Share on X

Why does a distance runner need the skill of speed? The more comfortable a distance runner is at running fast, the easier it feels to run at an aerobic race pace and the more economical the athlete performs the function of running. Speed is an athletic movement. Endurance runners do well in distance races, but endurance athletes win distance races. Speed helps turn the endurance runner into an endurance athlete.

Several forms of speed training can be utilized to build the function of speed in the athlete. Speed training as basic as 60-yard strides at the end of a warm-up can be trained almost on a daily basis. Flys of 30-50 meters are also useful. The types of speed training utilized by most distance coaches are:

• Speed
• Speed endurance
• Special endurance 1
• Special endurance 2

Those distances go all the way up to 600 meters and build fast twitch, strength, and lactate tolerance. The variance of distances and speeds used together and sequenced properly in a macrocycle work together to prepare the athlete for the culminating event.

3. Strength and Mobility

If you wanted to build a V8 engine that can also go from 0-60 in a few seconds, you wouldn’t put that engine in the frame of a Pinto. That’s where this third pillar comes in—if you assign the work required to build a strong, aerobic, and fast athlete into a young runner without a strong athletic background, many stress-related problems will start to occur because their body just can’t handle it.

So, what type of strength does a distance runner need in order to handle the stresses of training required to improve? The basic answer is…all of it.

So, what type of strength does a distance runner need in order to handle the stresses of training required to improve? The basic answer is…all of it, says @DuplisseyJeremy. Share on X

I like to build strength from the knee to the shoulder and all points in between. Start with the quadriceps to the hip flexors with the lunge matrix or band work, and the runner can handle the mileage required to build an aerobic engine. The abdominal and all the core muscles help the athlete hold form throughout the race; if that form breaks down, it could reduce the runner’s speed and efficiency while increasing the likelihood of injury.

The chest and shoulder strength come in at the end of the race—during the kick, extra upper-body strength is used to bring about that last bit of form and speed needed to win the sprint finish. Mobility comes into play with the reduction of stiffness of muscles and joints, which could adversely affect movement, cause reduced efficiency, and increase the risk of injury. Strength training should be performed throughout the year and macrocycle to an extent necessary to prepare the athlete to perform their best.

4. Rest

I’ve heard many coaches talk about how their athletes performed due to a specific type of training or workout, but athletes don’t actually respond to a program or workout—they perform as a result of recovering from the stresses of that program or workout. Rest is essential. The stress put on an athlete flexes the body—if they don’t recover from that stress, they cannot benefit from it. The various stresses create micro tears in the muscle and those tears need to heal. That’s where recovery comes in.

Athletes don’t actually respond to a program or workout—they perform as a result of recovering from the stresses of that program or workout. Rest is essential, says @DuplisseyJeremy. Share on X

Rest in distance running comes in different forms at different times, and for different reasons. Easy running is a form of rest. The reason the athlete runs on a recovery day instead of no work at all is that the run elevates the runner’s pulse to above 120 beats per minute. That helps bring the healing blood to the damaged tissues from the hard workout and flush out the toxins created by the damage of the workout. Recovery days should be treated with as much importance as each hard workout day.

Another form of rest is sleep. The endurance runner experiences a stress that is unlike most other athletes, and most of the healing from that stress comes through sleep. An endurance athlete needs at least eight hours per night, and if that is not possible due to schoolwork or other factors, the coach should alter or reduce the training because the athlete is unable to properly recover from the workout.

The last type of rest is actual days off. During a macrocycle, a rest day can be done a few ways without reduction of performance. Once a week is the most popular among high school athletes; however, a high school athlete should not go more than 21 days without at least one rest day.

Outside of the macrocycle, the athlete needs a rest period more for psychological than physiological reasons. High school coach and physiology teacher Scott Christensen says a high school runner needs about six weeks off in a calendar year. Other coaches say that rest of longer than two weeks at a time leads to injury once the athlete starts back up. The best method is the one that works for your program and athletes, but they do need some form of a rest period following a season.

Know Your Athletes

Building high school distance runners involve many factors outside of these four pillars, but every successful program I’ve reviewed has some form of these pillars. These are the mechanics of a high school distance program, but the most important factor—which we can call the roof that caps it all off—would be the understanding that the athlete you are fortunate enough to coach does not care what you know or how you present it unless they know how much you care about them.

You are coaching young learners, and individual human beings. They all come from different backgrounds, have different experiences, and have different abilities. Knowing your athletes and how they respond to different stresses is the key to applying these pillars in developing the athletes you coach into the best they can be.

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

One of the toughest jobs of a performance coach in professional soccer is keeping the players who are not in the match-day squad, match-day fit. The match is the largest stimulus (in terms of volume, intensity, and specificity) the players get each week; meaning that the players who do not participate in it are missing out on a huge part of the weekly training load. Therefore, it falls on the performance coach to make up for that missing stimulus by conducting match-day sessions for this group of reserve players.

This already important session was elevated to a higher level of pertinence this past year with the COVID-19 pandemic. The implications of the pandemic were twofold: first, the shortened season caused increased fixture congestion, meaning more players were being rotated, which required more players to be moving in and out of the match-day squad. Second, to prevent bubble contamination between the USL and MLS teams, the players who were not in the match-day squad were not able to play with the USL team, which would usually be the case. This resulted in an increased number of players participating in the Reserve Group Session as well as an increased importance on these sessions being as intense and as specific as possible.

In this article I outline how we at Real Salt Lake attempted to make our match-day reserve group sessions as beneficial as possible. We established a framework that we could easily modify based on the needs of the players in the session, as well as the total number of players participating. The example session given in this article is based on having six players, which was a common number we had in the sessions this year.

As a framework for our match-day reserve group sessions, we wanted to first address the physical outputs missed by the players by not participating in the match—volume, intensity, specificity. Share on X

When deciding on a framework, we wanted to first address the physical outputs that the players were missing by not participating in the match. As mentioned previously, the main variables we want to take into account are volume, intensity, and specificity. From a volume perspective, while the numbers will inevitably vary by position and are also heavily predicated on your team’s playing style, we can assume the players not participating in the match will miss out on 9,000-11,000 total meters of movement. While it is not often feasible (an optimal versus practical dilemma) to replicate all of that volume, we aim to accumulate around 75% of it, or approximately 6,500-8,500 meters.

In terms of intensity, we look at this variable through the lens of high-velocity intensity, which tends to be more taxing on the hamstrings, and acceleration/deceleration intensity, which tends to tax the anterior chain (quads and hips flexors) to a higher degree. These metrics are much easier to accumulate over the course of a session and, depending on the player/time of year, may even be overloaded in a Reserve Group Session. Again, speaking in broad strokes, players can accumulate 500-1,000 meters of high-speed running (meters covered >19.8 km/hr), 50-300 meters of sprinting (>25.2 km/hr), and 30-50 high-intensity accelerations and decelerations (defined as a change in velocity +/- 3 m/s/s) in a match. Therefore, we can use those numbers as benchmarks (and can be more specific based on which players are in the session) to guide our session design.

After accounting for the total physical output in the session, we wanted to make sure we used this day to elevate players’ physical capacities through more intense training methods that are only dosed in small levels during the week in team training (i.e., max-velocity sprinting, plyometrics, and strength training). Since the majority of these sessions fall on a Saturday, it is the perfect time to really push the envelope with these training modalities, being that Friday is an easy day of team training and Sunday is generally an off day.

Finally, we wanted to try and make the sessions as specific as possible from a soccer standpoint. This not only keeps the players’ motivation high (not very many players enjoy coming in on Saturday just to run and lift) but also helps mitigate the risk of injury by stressing the same muscles and movement patterns that they are missing out on from the match, and it is conducive to the players continuing to develop technically.

Session Outline:

1. Physical Warm-Up – 20 minutes
   1. General circulation and joint mobility.
   2. Running technique drills.
   3. Plyometrics.
   4. Change of direction/Agility.

2. Technical Warm-Up – 6-10 minutes
   1. Passing and receiving over short distances.

3. Maximal Velocity Sprinting – 8-12 minutes
4. Technical Drill 1 – 10-15 minutes
   1. Passing and receiving over medium/large distances.

5. High-Velocity Conditioning – 6-12 minutes
6. Technical Drill 2 – 10-15 minutes
   1. Passing over long distances and shooting.

7. Small-Sided Games – 10-15 minutes
8. Repeat Effort Conditioning – 10-20 minutes
9. Total Body Strength Training

1. Physical Warm-Up (20 minutes)

The session starts, as all sessions do, with a dynamic warm-up. Five minutes of jogging, back pedaling, and other light dynamic movements to increase the muscle temperature and circulation to the working muscles. Next is five minutes of mobility-based dynamic movements both moving and on the ground. Then we move on to some traditional track-based technique drills. I am a big fan of Derek Hansen’s A-Skip and A-Run progressions¹, so we take the players through each of those to reinforce running technique and slowly increase the intensity of the warm-up.

Now, as we are approximately 15 minutes into the warm-up, we move more toward the performance end of the spectrum with plyometrics (horizontal, vertical, or a mixture of both). These drills may vary over the course of the year, but generally include various skips and bounds over 30-40 meters and/or different hurdle hop drills. The warm-up concludes with some longer distance build-ups (25-40 meters) and some high-intensity change of direction drills, reinforcing good acceleration and deceleration positions.

2. Technical Warm-Up (6-10 minutes)

The technical warm-up is generally an activity where the players execute simple passing and receiving maneuvers over small distances (5-15 meters). Despite the simplicity of the exercise, small distances, and short work periods, athletes should still perform these drills with maximal intensity to replicate the speed of match play. This drill serves as an extension of the warm-up and does not have a physical emphasis other than warming up the muscles and movements involved in soccer-specific actions.

3. Maximal Velocity Sprinting (8-12 minutes)

Maximal velocity exposure is something that we train during the week as a team, but we want to make sure we replicate the missing stimulus of the game as well, as we know more exposure to high-velocity sprinting may have a preventative effect against future injuries.² We generally will do a few reps of straight-line fly-in sprints as well as a few reps of curvilinear sprints (figure 2). The fly-in sprints make for easy filming and reinforcing top-end speed mechanics.

Maximal velocity exposure is something that we train during the week as a team, but we want to make sure we replicate the missing stimulus of the game as well, says @CoachCotter2. Share on X

Curvilinear sprints also play an important role for soccer players, as they are the most common type of sprints performed in a match.³ They stress the leg musculature differently than straight-line sprinting⁴ and therefore are beneficial to train in addition to traditional straight-line sprinting. We perform the sprints at this point of the session in an attempt to thread the needle between being sufficiently warmed up for such an intense exercise and not being so fatigued as to diminish maximal output. Again, the exact style and distances of the sprints will vary depending on a number of variables (what players are in the session, preceding and upcoming schedule, etc.), and it is up to the practitioner to determine what is appropriate for the players on that day.

It is important to note that this is a sprinting exercise and not a fitness exercise. The players are given 2-3 minutes of rest between reps and should feel like they have recovered before the next rep. Typical track and field guidelines would suggest that you take a minimum one-minute rest for 10 meters sprinted to ensure complete recovery between reps. While that is physiologically optimal (another optimal versus practical dilemma), it can be difficult in practice to require non-track athletes to take 4+ minutes of rest between 40-meter sprints. We have found 2-3 minutes’ rest between reps is sort of a sweet spot in terms of still getting quality repetitions and not having this portion of session drag on for too long.

4. Technical Drill 1 (10-15 minutes)

After sprinting, we move on to a second technical drill that requires the players to play passes over larger (10-25 meter) distances. Usually, we incorporate some sort of finishing on a mini goal at the end of the drill and make it a competition either between the players or against the clock (e.g., first player to score three goals, the drill ends when the team scores 15 goals, etc.). The competition element may seem like a small detail, but in my experience, it goes a long way toward keeping the effort and energy high.

Figure 3 is an example of a passing drill that requires quick combination play between players and ends with a well-timed run-in behind the theoretical back line and finish on a mini goal. As with every drill in this session, you can modify the demands and objectives based on the positions of the players in the session and the style of play of the team.

5. High-Velocity Conditioning (6-10 minutes)

Our first block of conditioning is of the higher velocity nature, usually being some variation of strides/tempo runs. The benefits of tempo runs are well known in the track community⁶, and we believe those benefits carry over to soccer players as well. First, it allows the athletes to condition aerobically without becoming too lactic, which could dampen their ability to complete the remainder of the session with high quality. Second, tempo runs give the athletes the opportunity to work on high-speed running mechanics more so than slower-paced aerobic drills. Third, it exposes the athletes to higher velocities than they often see during normal team training, which is frequently dominated by small-sided games in small spaces.

The benefits of tempo runs are well known in the track community, and we believe those benefits carry over to soccer players as well, says @CoachCotter2. Share on X

6. Technical Drill 2 (10-15 minutes)

Our last technical drill of the day involves hitting balls over the largest distances (20-40 meters) and finishing on goal. Obviously, not every player gets the chance to shoot on goal during a match, but we want to make sure that it is a skill the players continue to develop regardless of position. Out of all the drills, this one requires the longest periods of continuous time on the ball (10-20 seconds), the highest intensity actions (jumping/shooting/sprinting), and incomplete rest periods. This allows for some lactate accumulation and helps prepare players for the “worst-case scenario” in a match, when they might be required to perform a lot of demanding actions in a short period of time. Additionally, lactate accumulation, toward the end of a session, can be beneficial in inducing an anabolic hormone response.⁷

7. Small-Sided Games (10-15 minutes)

Despite the players already getting a healthy dose of this type of training during the week, it still has the merits of requiring quick decision-making and serves almost as a carrot toward the end of the session that the players enjoy. The space is kept intentionally tight to require a lot of high-intensity actions and ball involvements per minute.⁸ The coach puts another ball in play as soon as one goes out of bounds to keep the pace of the drill high (figure 6).

8. Repeat Effort Conditioning (10-20 minutes)

Our final on-field drill of the day is a repeat acceleration/deceleration conditioning drill that I stole from Derek Hansen’s excellent “Running Mechanics Professional” course.¹ This drill requires constant repeat acceleration efforts over a short period of time, which again, helps our players be prepared for the “worst-case scenario” and helps accumulate the number of accelerations that they would typically see on match day.⁹

There are a few different versions of this drill that you can run based on what physical metrics/actions you are after. The version that we use most often can be seen in figure 7, with 10-meter accelerations every nine seconds, for 90 seconds. However, if you wanted to elicit some higher velocity accelerations, you could push the distance out to 15 meters and change the duration to every 12 seconds. If you are after more decelerations in this portion of the session, you could add a 5-meter deceleration zone at the end of the acceleration zone, or even make it a 10-meter out and back drill with a full change of direction.

9. Weight Room (30-45 minutes)

After the on-field session is completed, we also have a strength training session. This day represents a great opportunity to do some more intense strength training (heavy and/or eccentric-focused) since the following day is off. Again, our goal for this day is not only to expose the players to a match-like stimulus but also train to improve their physical capacities.

Our goal for this day is not only to expose the players to a match-like stimulus but also train to improve their physical capacities, says @CoachCotter2. Share on X

Keeping Players Match-Fit

In conclusion, the above template is what we utilized this (unconventional) year to try and keep our players match-fit. It allows us to easily swap out different drills while still making sure we hit all of the physical and technical parameters that we want. It is definitely not perfect (many ways to skin a cat) and remains a work in progress, but hopefully it is something that other coaches might take some inspiration from and tweak to their needs.

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

References

1. Hansen, D. (n.d.). In Running Mechanics Professional. Retrieved from https://www.runningmechanics.com/

2. Malone, S., Roe, M., Doran, D.A., et al. “High chronic training loads and exposure to bouts of maximal velocity running reduce injury risk in elite Gaelic football.” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2017;20:250. Doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2016.08.005

3. Filter, A., Olivares-Jabalera, J., Santalla, A., et al. “Curve Sprinting in Soccer: Kinematic and Neuromuscular Analysis.” International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2020;41(11):744-750. doi:10.1055/a-1144-3175

4. Churchill, S.M., Salo, A.I.T., and Trewartha, G. “The effect of the bend on technique and performance during maximal effort sprinting.” Sports Biomechanics. 2015; 14 (1):106-121.

5. Jouaux, T. (2015). “Technical Warmup: 50 Exercises Handout.”

6. Francis, C. The Structure of Training for Speed (Key Concepts 2008 Edition)(p. 18).

7. Godfrey, R. J., Madgwick, Z., and Whyte, G. P. “The exercise-induced growth hormone response in athletes.” Sports Medicine. 2003;33(8):599-613.

8. Owen, A., Twist, C., and Ford, P. “Small-sided games: The physiological and technical effect of altering pitch size and player numbers.” Insight. 2004;7:50-53.

9. Russell, M., Sparkes, W., Northeast, J., et al. “Changes in Acceleration and Deceleration Capacity Throughout Professional Soccer Match-Play.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016;30(10): 2839-2844. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000805

There are countless ways to perform movements, many philosophies that make sense, and innumerable methods of programming, so it would be absurd to claim that my way is the only way. I often stumble across something online that differs considerably with an approach of mine but doesn’t necessarily contradict it. There are, however, a lot of practices or opinions that I feel could use some help and a short list of concepts or setups that I feel are simply wrong or misunderstood.

Based simply on my own experience and a long time trying to rationalize certain craziness, this article contains 21 tips to potentially help change the way people view certain concepts or techniques. The idea came to me recently when a memory popped up on some social media platform of me and Jeremy Frisch authoring an article for T-Nation about 14 years ago titled “50 Tips for Serious Athletes.” It was a pretty fun and simple article that got a lot of love. I think people appreciate concise actionable tips that they can implement at the drop of a hat, and I hope to do the original some justice.

It’s never a bad time to challenge your own beliefs, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

I categorize the list into three parts. First are simple setup, organization, and technique missteps. From equipment setups to body positions, there are a few repeat offenders that I want to discuss first. Second, I highlight thought-process or concept-related elements. Occasionally, I’ll read something that changes my view on a topic, while at other times practical experience wins out, but it’s never a bad time to challenge your own beliefs. Last, I lay out some programming and training plan considerations that may or may not get me assassinated by the Armchair Warrior’s Guild.

First up…

Common Setup Flaws, Organizational Ideas, and Technique Errors

1. Lasers: Type, Setup, and Data Collection

The first issue I see fairly often is not placing the start laser in the correct place. There are a few potential “correct” ways to time sprints. Most “dash” timing involves first movement starts or off a “gun,” but none, in my opinion, should allow large magnitude displacement before the clock starts.

This is exactly what “two-point, front foot laser starts” result in, and it’s why that method is completely inaccurate. Obvious to many, by the time the front foot lifts and the laser is tripped, the athlete has established well over 1 yard of displacement and gained that much more momentum. Using this method, it’s not uncommon to see 10-yard times in the 1.2’s for faster athletes. That time should trigger a warning, and anyone understanding speed would step back and consider the issue at hand.

The first movement must start the clock. If for some reason you must only time two-point stance sprints, try setting up the laser on the back foot. It definitely creates more of a logistics nightmare having to move it for each individual stance, but at least you’re approaching what is standard. In almost all sprint timing, the clock starts on first movement. Be safe and use a three-point front hand laser position.

The second is laser height on subsequent gates. Mid-shin or knee-high beams don’t make much sense to me at all. Universally timed near the hip or waist, it’s almost certainly inaccurate to time a sprint with the shin or knee. The shin will be ahead of the hip by however long your femur is.

Lastly, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the double-beam versus single-beam argument. Single-beam lasers fail in terms of accuracy. Anything that trips the laser will stop the clock. An arm or hand, knee or rogue bird could maybe stop the timer. A double-beam laser will differentiate between an early trip when a second trip (arm then torso) is in close proximity. Whenever possible, go with a double beam.

2. Bands & Chains: Height, Tension, and Repeatability

I’ve seen a lot of band setups that leave much to be desired. I don’t want 12 pounds of variable resistance. The strength curve for any athlete using this tool should require a much larger gap between the top and bottom of the movement. That’s why setting up your bands to have adequate tension at both end ranges is important.

Chains are the same. One long chain attached to the bar sleeve will provide very little variance in the load. At the top there might be 40 pounds of added chains and at the bottom 28 pounds. That is barely variable resistance if you’re squatting any appreciable load. Use a chain loader to get enough weight to create a significant increase in load and earn the nomenclature of variable or accommodating resistance.

3. Push-Up: Scap Movement > Humeral Movement

Moving mainly through the humerus (flexion/extension) rather than scapular retraction during a push-up is a mistake I see most athletes making when they first step into the gym. Somewhere along the line they learned this pattern. Since the “closer elbow” trend started, people took this to the extreme and brought their elbows all the way to their ribs. This position doesn’t allow the scapula to move on the ribs, and all you’re left with is extension of the humerus.

The eye test alone should deter this erroneous pattern. I suggest about 45 degrees of abduction (give or take) to allow retraction, which will aid in shoulder health and provide a better overall pushing position.

4. Utilize Wall Space to Save Time and Help Instruct

The use of conversion charts, information posters, and wall templates is a surefire way to increase efficiency in your training space. I wrote an entire article on this topic, so I’ll save time and space and just link to it here.

5. Bench Press Setup Is More Than Just Hand Width

Every exercise has a novella’s worth of cues, tips, and instructions that will make or break the lift. There are tons of setups, foot positions, hand positions, and so on that are semantics across different individuals, but there are a few basic tips that can drastically improve a bench press’s functionality, safety, and execution that I don’t see in the “athletic” population. Most powerlifters have all of these down, and I’m sure they would roll their eyes at this post, but many people in collegiate, high school, and private S&C facilities are missing a chunk of these tips that I will list below.

There are a few basic tips that can drastically improve a bench press’s functionality, safety, and execution that I don’t see in the “athletic” population, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

• • Hand width: Unless you are doing a special grip, I suggest finding a grip that gives you the best leverage over the bar. Most of the time, I like the fist to be above the elbows at the bottom of the press and the forearms mainly perpendicular to the floor. As a side note, the name “close grip” should be changed to “closer grip.” A slightly narrower grip is enough to create the change in emphasis and not enough to wreak havoc on the wrists and elbows.

 

• • Scap position: The scapula should be retracted and typically depressed quite a bit. The idea is to pin the scap to the bench and get the shoulders in a stable position using your upper back and lats.

 

• • Back arch: Yes, you should arch. How much you should arch depends on quite a few variables, but lying flat puts your shoulders in a disadvantageous position, requires more range of motion and extension of the humerus, and ruins the bar path for optimal pressing.

 

• • Foot position: There are debates and rule differences regarding heels flat or not, but your feet should be closer to your head than your knees. Get them far enough back to be able to press your feet into the ground, create tension through your hips and legs, and not allow your butt to lift during the concentric portion. This is tricky for people at first, but the worst thing you can do is allow your feet to be soft on the ground and in front of your knees (feet should not be farther from your head than your knees).

 

• • Eccentric: I like to cue an active pulling during the eccentric portion, rather than simply passively allowing the bar to fall. Keep lats on, guiding your elbows down (not out) and the bar just below the sternum.

 

• Concentric: Think about pushing yourself through the bench. The cue “drive the bar up and slightly toward the rack” works best for most people.

Whether or not you use any or all of those suggestions, I think focusing on the scap and foot positions could be an instant game changer for most people.

Thought Process and Concepts

6. Range of Motion Is Not the End-All, Be-All

This is the first of three controversial range of motion points I will make in this section. Yes, when you have control over a range of motion, by all means, train it. The more and more I watch people squat and hinge, the less I am concerned with the arbitrary standard “full range.” Depending on body proportions, bone structures, injury history, and a slew of other factors, sometimes depth is unattainable. The options are to train around it or get the ROM through ill-advised mandates. Excluding powerlifters, where squat depth is not a suggestion but a mandatory marker for a successful lift, I don’t care if an athlete can do a full ass-to-grass squat with load. I care that they use the range of motion they currently possess.

I don’t care if an athlete can do a full ass-to-grass squat with load. I care that they use the range of motion they currently possess, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

7. Use Technology to Determine Appropriate Range of Motion

My second point will elaborate on the previous point. Barbell tracking technology—for example, GymAware or Vmaxpro—can provide you with an objective range of motion as you use your eye to verbally cue the pattern. For example, have your athlete squat with moderate weight to a comfortable depth, for you and the athlete, where they have control over their spine and maintain a good position. The technology will display the range of motion, and the remaining sets can be compared to the initial/optimal findings.

8. Stop Demonizing the Partial Squat…or Partial Anything

My final point on range of motion seems to really bother people. We use partial squats. We do partial speed squats and partial maximal or supramaximal squats as well. I will stick to a single exercise—in this case, the squat, for brevity’s sake—but we use partial movements in a number of exercises.

Tell me why the RDL (single or double leg) and trap bar deadlift, both partial range of motion exercises, are beloved by many while the partial squat is vilified and demonized by the masses. Even the Bulgarian split squat is often done with less range of motion than a true 90-degree squat.

Watch sporting movements, jumps, sprints, and everything else on the field, court, or ice. They are often done in a partial range of motion demanding high magnitudes of force or velocity. Why would we not want to emphasize this in training from time to time? In fact, we find partial speed squats and partial heavy squats translate just as well, if not better, to sprint and jump performances when compared to the traditional “full range of motion.”

The one argument I can understand is for injury prevention or tissue integrity at end ranges. This doesn’t affect my opinion, however, as we train full ranges of motion in a multitude of other movements more suitable for pushing the end range a bit more.

9. Use Technology to Verify a Program’s Efficacy…or Lack Thereof

Jump mats, force plates, timing lasers, barbell tracking tech—whatever you can get your hands on can be an effective way of keeping you honest. I hope everyone believes in their programs, but how many people test them? Using 1RM testing can provide some context but often that is just a small piece of the puzzle.

When dealing with generalists (anyone not competing in weightlifting or powerlifting), the important stuff is how the strength work applies to the sport. I still believe getting stronger should be a priority for most programs; however, speed, power, endurance, and a few hundred other qualities might be of more value than a 1RM bench test for a soccer player.

10. Progressions: Not Just for Lifts

Conditioning could be the most overgeneralized term in the industry but having the ability to repeat efforts for an entire game can separate the good from the great. Designing effective, challenging, and progressive energy system programs is the key.

The design shouldn’t be to crush everyone and let them slowly get more tolerant of the same dose over an extended time. That’s not how you design strength programs, and it’s not how you should design conditioning either. For example, two 300-yard shuttles are brutal on Day 1 of the off-season but on the easier side come the end.

For years, we have utilized a progressive system for all of our energy system development and testing protocols. We start out using shorter duration running with similar work:rest ratios and slowly progress the work distances, maintaining a very similar total distance and work:rest ratio. We do this with shuttles, longer tests (2-mile, Cooper), and general conditioning, like cardiac power intervals or aerobic density work on the bike, as well.

We’ve created a few templates that allow the athlete to visualize each phase of the program and see how it progresses and where they are at any given point in the off-season.

11. Stop Teaching Everyone to Land Soft

As with most “rules” or concepts, there are exceptions. Teaching certain people (young, old, novice, injured, early off-season) how to land soft and absorb force quietly can be of use. However, sport is not soft, and it’s not quiet—it’s filled with violent collisions both body-to-body and body-to-ground, and if you constantly do light and quiet single leg hops over 6-inch hurdles, you do your athletes a disservice when it comes time to cut and sprint in the game.

Box jumps and low-amplitude hopping has its place. But incorporating pogo jumps, drop jumps, multi-rebound jumps, weighted jumps, Russian and Polish plyos focusing on stiffness, and many other exercises will turn your athletes into better performing mutants come game day.

12. Body Weight Is Not Enough

Certain patterns are categorized as “body weight only.” To me, that misses a huge opportunity. You can manipulate single-leg squats, push-ups, glute extensions, and more exactly like any other lift. Strong people can add considerable load in any of the previously mentioned movements to target better adaptation.

If strength is the goal, 20 push-ups might be far from appropriate. Try adding some considerable weight to your back and pushing in the 5-8 rep range occasionally. Many athletes despise single-leg squats. If you prescribe eight reps, many will stop at eight reps regardless of how many reps they have in reserve. Encouraging the use of additional load to make the prescription challenging is the only thing that makes sense. And for people who use 5- to 10-pound plates in their hands…yes, that counts, but we all know that actually makes them easier due to the counterweight.

13. The Bulgarian Split Squat Has Its Own Risk/Reward to Consider… (*cough* and It’s Not Single-Leg)

We use Bulgarian split squats all the time. It’s just not a true single-leg movement pattern. If you’ve ever done them with considerable weight, you’d probably agree. My real argument here is that they do not magically eliminate all risk just because of less axial loading. Asymmetrical loading on the pelvis can play an integral role in changing the position of the spine. The rear foot height can alter the pelvis and hip significantly as well. The stride length can put more weight either on the front leg or the back hip and even the front foot position can stress the knee, hip, or back, depending on its position.

My real argument here is that Bulgarian split squats do not magically eliminate all risk just because of less axial loading, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

Next time someone tells you no one should squat, ask them to consider the implications of other movements before they spout off claims from the heavens.

14. It’s Called Velocity-Based Training, Not Max-Velocity Training

The response “Well, if we want to train velocity, we’ll just sprint, cause it’s faster than lifting” is just a strange way of saying you don’t understand VBT in the slightest. My contention is that its efficacy is only ever diminished to save the objector from having to purchase the tools to experience VBT.

Velocity-based training is decision-making. It’s goal or target setting, and it’s highly effective. If you want outcome X, stay in velocity range Y. Maximal efforts with mean velocity .19 m/s will by no means elicit the same adaptation and response as multiple sets of .79 m/s. When we have a tool as simple as some of the VBT systems are, it seems crazy not to use them.

Besides the more accurate targeting of motor abilities, giving athletes visual and objective feedback on their effort is invaluable. Hook up a transducer to a bar and have an athlete squat or jump or bench or whatever. I guarantee a noticeable change in the effort displayed from set 1. Cost aside, if you can get your hands on a VBT system, experiment and look into the actual application a bit before using the excuse I mentioned above.

When we have a tool as simple as some of the VBT systems are, it seems crazy not to use them, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

Programming Errors and Considerations

15. Pairing Everything and Anything

I’m just not a fan of pairing main movements that are not intended to potentiate or benefit one another. I understand time restraints can play a huge role in how college strength coaches program and lay out their lifts, but when time is less of a concern, let rest aid in the efforts.

Main lifts don’t need an ab and mobility exercise paired with them, especially if there is any cross-contamination, so to speak. I don’t want my upper back and core fatigued going into a heavy front squat. To me, this adds unnecessary risk all in the name of squeezing things in.

16. Pairing Considerations: More Than the Agonist

To expound a little on my previous point regarding pairing movements, I will discuss four items I think should get more consideration when pairing.

1. The first is grip-intensive pairing. Grip is a determining factor in many lifts. Yet many programs disregard it, at least in terms of considering its overuse. Let me explain through a hypothetical.It wouldn’t be uncommon to see a Bulgarian split squat using DBs at the side on a number of programs across many facilities and institutions. Some of those programs will undoubtedly be total body lifts and many might include chin-ups, RDLs, cleans, and/or rows. Most of those seem to be fairly different categorically. However, imagine completing 80-100 reps of those previously mentioned exercises and having to hold a pair of dumbbells. At the very least, you’ll be more inclined to grab a lighter weight, otherwise you might have trouble holding your steering wheel on the drive home. The agonists or main point of the lifts all differ greatly, but what might go unnoticed is how much demand they put on the hands and forearms.
2. My second pairing no-no is brief but important to mention: core-involved overlap. Not every lift involves a high degree of core stability, so using low-taxing movements when pairing with high-taxing movements can benefit the athlete greatly. A quick example is pairing core patterns with push-ups, mostly seen in circuit-style programming. Maybe using supine or standing triceps patterns would be more beneficial when pairing with a challenging core pattern. My next point will involve the core pairing a bit more but from a slightly different position—pun intended.
3. Third are positional-redundancy pairing issues. When pairing two seemingly unrelated movements, you should consider what they will require. For example, hamstring + rowing patterns. We already discussed grip and core, so let’s tie those into this point as well.The Nordic hamstring curl has no grip but a lot of core requirements. What row can we pair with it? The bent-over row has core, grip, and hamstring involvement, so maybe that’s a bad choice. Maybe inverted row is another bad choice because if you’ve ever tried to hold a bridge in the inverted row right after a challenging set of hamstring work, you might recall the cramp/fatigue that can pop up after a couple sets. My argument is that a chest-supported DB row might be the perfect complement to Nordic hamstring curls, and while the agonist mid/upper back was the only target for your program, the outside factors could make or break how it is applied.
4. Last is more of a generalization on biomotor abilities pairing. At certain times, it’s important to just get a bunch of stuff done. Other times in the most conjugate of conjugate programs, everything is all mixed in and it works. But I would argue that having more biomotor ability-focused programs can be very beneficial in how your athletes adapt.I think most people tend to agree that pairing like qualities—speed and power, for example—complement each other a lot better than, say, speed and glycolytic work. That’s why you will often see separate sessions for acceleration and lactic work, but it is much more common to see poorly paired lifting plans. I’m not sure why it’s not looked at in the same manner.

   If you are on a mainly “power” focused strength day, exercise selection may include Olympic work, speed/heavy squats, throws, sprints, and jumps. They all seem to coexist well, and might all be perfectly laid out, but if your rep ranges are going from 3’s to 20’s and in a circuit-style complex, I doubt you’ll achieve the desired effect. In summary, although power cleans are considered “explosive” or “power” exercises, nothing done for 15 reps per set is considered “power.”

The overall theme here is to consider the goal, take in non-agonist considerations, and remind yourself of the main objective for each lift and the lift as a whole before choosing exercises arbitrarily based on their globally intended use.

17. Believe It or Not, the Goblet Position Isn’t Always Best

I probably could have squeezed this in the previous point regarding pairing, but sometimes front loading someone in the goblet position isn’t the best approach. Yes, it is often a good choice for beginners to teach organizing themselves under a small load, but it has its own limitations. Spine flexion intolerance, anterior shoulder concerns, pairing with pressing patterns, and anterior-dominant young athletes are just a few of the reasons it could possibly be a poor choice for any athlete.

In terms of more advanced athletes, the position itself is somewhat problematic for a heavy loading option. It is not the same as the “front squat” position, and although it doesn’t axially load the spine the same, it most certainly brings along some shearing forces and flexion concerns because of the arm and upper back position. You can’t extend the thoracic spine well when your elbows are down and together. It’s just not manageable. So, although biasing toward a flexed thoracic spine won’t kill anyone, it could very well aggravate some people.

At some point you have to consider the following: Am I more concerned with challenging my athlete’s position and arms, or am I trying to develop leg strength and power, says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

And, at the very least, holding a 200-pound DB like a goblet is absurdly challenging for a lot of people. But how many strong people have trouble squatting 200 pounds? The answer is not many. At some point you have to consider the following: Am I more concerned with challenging my athlete’s position and arms, or am I trying to develop leg strength and power?

18. Cookie Cutter Programming Can Be Eliminated with a Little Planning

Giving everyone on the team the same program might be the only option for some coaches. Limited space, low coach-to-athlete ratios, and a host of other issues make it challenging to individualize, but planning eliminates this challenge. Take some time to create some templates that consider movement restrictions, equipment sharing limitations, athlete ability differences, and needs analysis considerations, and even consider the different training schedules across athletes and across seasons. Ability/genetic makeup and schedule considerations are the two main factors we consider regarding program differences in our population.

A lot of our athletes, more now than ever, have to do a jump/force/velocity type of assessment to get the program that fits best with their needs. It doesn’t mean their whole plan is different than their teammate’s, but maybe the emphasis on some patterns will differ slightly. We designed a quadrant system to categorize these athletes, and although it takes me a little more time programming, these programs have worked better, and we will use them later for other athletes. Improving the product and the athlete are primary objectives.

My suggestion for coaches with lots of constraints would be to slowly lay out your template system, figure out how to assess and categorize as efficiently as possible, and then work in the nuances slowly over time. For example, your average high school football team might have 5-6 freaks who jump through the roof and 5-6 kids who are all kinds of destroyed. Maybe you have three programs: Regular, Freaks, and Wrecked. (Just don’t label the plans that way, as you might get some backlash.)

Schedule tendencies, mainly infrequency, is one of the biggest factors for us in terms of programming and how we lay out our field work and programming. Many of our athletes train 4-6 days per week, and this is the easy stuff. With 4-6 days, you have enough time and space to include a lot of movement patterns and target a few biomotor abilities. There are a decent number of clients who can only train 2-3 days per week and seem to be consistent on which days those are. This makes sense, because they are most likely bound by other obligations.

We have designed many different options for our strength programming, and we have changed up how we lay out our warm-up, preparation, and field work to account for this. We rotate through our warm-up protocols incongruently to the days of the week, so that people get enough consistency to learn and improve and enough variation to “touch it all” (so to speak), and we won’t do the same thing every Monday and Wednesday if they are consistent on their training days.

We do something similar with field work. We may keep Monday as an acceleration day and just change up the focus (heavy resisted accels, longer accels or RSA work, start-based technique), or we might rotate what category we do on Monday altogether and do a deceleration session on alternate weeks. Regardless of what we are doing, by mid-week we start to separate athletes into “what have you done this week” groups. From Wednesday through Saturday, we might have a couple different things going on during the field work. First day-ers might be doing starts while Third day-ers might be on a regen tempo day.

However we lay it out, we always try to consider the athletes and be flexible. The worst offender is the inflexible private facility. The one that only does X on Monday and Y on Tuesday and so on. It’s very likely you will have kids who never show up on Monday because of schedule issues…do they just never train the X variable?

Make some templates to allow for subtle nuances to improve your product and your athletes’ experiences and results.

19. Demographical Nuances: Age, Training Age, Sex/Gender

All of these nuances are simple to grasp. People who have less time under their training belt, less testosterone, and/or less strength and muscle can afford to use shorter rests and shorter overall lifting sessions. A very strong college athlete might take eight sets just to reach their first working set, whereas a younger novice athlete might get four sets of the same exercise done in six minutes. The general rules for rest do not apply because the loads are proportional but not high enough, in absolute terms, to require the same amount of time and preparation. An elite athlete might spend 3-4 hours total in a training session. If your 12-year-old is spending more than 60-90 minutes in the weight room, you are missing the boat.

20. Give More Freedom on the Least Important Stuff

Some will argue that biceps curls and ab work are vital to any good beach season or upcoming game. Look good, feel good. However, I am slightly less concerned with the volumes, rests, and exercise choices here than with the big stuff. Allow athletes who have some time with you to make choices on their “extra work.”

Allow athletes who have some time with you to make choices on their “extra work,” says @ExceedSPF. Share on X

We use “extra work” or “fun & guns” constantly. It makes for a better environment and gives the kids a little say in what they do. Sometimes we give a little more direction like “anterior core choice,” and sometimes we leave it completely open for interpretation. They appreciate it, and it saves me time trying to come up with the 28th bicep movement of the month.

21. Balancing “Push vs. Pull” Is Not Just Sets and Reps

There is a lot more to consider when dealing with balancing your push versus pull or posterior versus anterior. I think it’s much more important to consider the total tonnage and understand the imbalance most people have between the two opposites. For example, if you can bench 400 pounds and do 5×5 at 335, you would need 40+ reps using 100-pound DBs in a row pattern to simply match the tonnage. If you did 5×5 to even things out, or even 3×10, you probably wouldn’t do it justice. I tend to program more reps—significantly so—for pulling patterns to account for the discrepancy in pressing dominance for most people.

Nothing’s Written in Stone

This has been a blueprint of my views on training, and how we at Exceed Sports Performance & Fitness go about our day-to-day. I don’t assume everyone’s situation is the same as mine, so it is unlikely that we will all agree on each point, but I think there is something in here for everyone. There’s a chance some of my assertions will change over time, but I feel fairly confident that almost all of what I wrote will not.

As always, I am up for a chat or a comment to help me reconsider anything I write or believe, so reach out if you are inclined. A few of the points probably deserve a little more depth and time, so I’m hoping I can elaborate more on them in 2021, and maybe you can help reshape how I think of them. Happy New Year!

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