Blog

Creating a test battery can be difficult for many sports performance professionals, especially those with limited staff, equipment, space, and budget. However, it is our job as professionals (whether you are a strength and conditioning coach, athletic trainer, or sport coach) to provide the most appropriate test battery to assess our athletes as best we can.

Picking assessments can be challenging since many field-based sports contain so many dynamic performance attributes—it can be overwhelming when deciding where to begin. Working at the high school level and with a small budget, I do not have access to expensive equipment. This article will be for those coaches working with the bare minimum and making the best of it. I can confidently say the ideas provided will benefit team field sports.

Technology Is Your Friend

I originally wrote this article with the idea that these tests I mention will only require a field, tape measure, and a stopwatch; however, I have changed my mind, as there is plenty of inexpensive technology that coaches should invest in. So maybe, on second thought, we ditch those stopwatches and invest in technology.

The amount of technology that can fit into a cell phone or mobile device is astonishing. A coach can nearly have a mini sports lab at their fingertips. Not having a reliable or objective way to time or record linear sprints, vertical jumping, horizontal jumping, or change of direction tests is unacceptable at this point in time.

So maybe, on second thought, we ditch those stopwatches and invest in technology, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

For linear speed tests, I personally use a Freelap timing system. I purchased it myself because I wanted something reliable. If you are currently using a stopwatch or your smartphone to time linear speed, consider making an investment in a Freelap timing system. It will save you a lot of time and you can time a lot of athletes very smoothly.

If you do not have a few hundred dollars in your budget to afford a Freelap timing system, there are companies who have created affordable apps that can be used to record the time of linear sprints. There are a few other apps I use for other tests which I will address.

Test Selection

In order to decide what tests to use, the administrator of the test needs to break down the biomechanical and metabolic demands of the sport. Make sure the tests that are selected are valid and reliable. Each test should be able to assess the correct ability, and each test should be able to retest accurately over and over again. The selected tests should be administered several times during the year, which is why it is vital to select tests with high reliability.

Environmental factors play a role as well: testing surface, temperature, and the time of day all affect results. Tests are not just for identifying talent or fitness but are also ways to gauge athlete readiness to return to play after sustaining an injury. Reduce the guessing and subjectivity of return to play assessments and use these tests to properly evaluate the recovery of an athlete.

Every sport is different in some way, so make sure you customize your test battery to cater to the demands of the sport, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

If they are pain-free but their testing is significantly worse than before the injury, they might not be ready—a harsh reality for the athlete and coaching staff, but it is the safe and appropriate decision. Nothing kills an athlete’s confidence and motivation like back-to-back injuries.

In the high school setting, tryouts last about a week. In order to respect the available time of the coaching staff to evaluate specific skills of the athletes, it is best to perform the test battery in a single day. Since many of the tests may be assessing completely different physical qualities, it is important to perform each test in a certain order. That order being:

1. 1. Body-composition tests (I personally do not perform these because I am at the high school level)

 

1. 1. Change of direction tests

 

1. 1. Max power

 

1. 1. Sprint tests

 

1. 1. Muscular endurance

 

1. 1. Anaerobic capacity tests

 

1. Aerobic capacity tests

These are all just potential examples. Every sport is different in some way, so make sure you customize your test battery to cater to the demands of the sport.

Change of Direction Testing

The ability to change directions is key for most team and individual sports. These types of assessments are typically performed well by those who can achieve higher velocities in linear speed assessments. However, in my experience, many coaches (especially in football) do not always value linear speed and believe change of direction tests are better at evaluating “game speed” and ability.

If you follow the NFL and its combine, you’ve probably heard of DK Metcalf. He had a blazing fast 40-yard dash but a poor three-cone drill (commentators even mentioned how it was worse than Tom Brady’s). DK Metcalf has been doing just fine in the NFL despite his three-cone drill results.

Some other assessments made popular by the NFL combine are 5-10-5 (pro-agility shuttle) and the L-drill. However, you can always create your very own change of direction test and customize the angle of the direction change, which can range from 45-180 degrees.

I would caution coaches against making the test longer than seven seconds so as to keep the test anaerobic and alactic. I imagine these tests to be power/speed tests more than anything else. For example, 300-yard shuttles are assessing something much different and are not an evaluation of change of direction in my opinion.

Change of direction tests can also be used to evaluate asymmetries. Evaluating an athlete’s performance when pushing off or changing direction on both the left and right legs can be important in determining if the athlete is proficient at absorbing/producing force on both limbs.

Change of direction tests can also be used to evaluate asymmetries, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

Assessing both limbs is important for understanding potential movement problems or deficiencies. An athlete with a large deficit between their limbs could be at risk for injury. Knowing how each limb performs independently can also help determine if an injured athlete is ready to return to play based on their test scores in rehab.

The Freelap timing system can be used to time change of direction tests as well. Visit the SimpliFaster YouTube channel and you will find informative videos from Christopher Glaeser on how to do this.

If you do not have a few hundred dollars to invest in a Freelap timing system, there are more affordable options: Dartfish Express is a film analysis app (that costs about seven dollars) which has a built-in chronometer that can be used to accurately measure time down to one hundredth of a second. If you want to be able to export the videos, you have to upgrade to Dartfish Mobile, which is five dollars per month.

Linear Speed Testing

This is the test that can literally change the course of an athlete’s career. Many colleges are heavily recruiting based on speed these days, and if an athlete is not performing well in linear speed, colleges probably will not be taking a chance on them—no matter how impressive their high school highlight tape is.

The most popular linear speed assessment in the states is the 40-yard dash. This again is another test popularized by the NFL combine, but other sports have their own linear speed assessments: MLS uses a 30-meter dash test and the MLB uses a 60-yard dash test. They all are evaluating linear speed over different distances.

Make sure you are using a reliable timing system. I reached into my own wallet to purchase my own Freelap timing system for my school. Having a reliable timing system will increase your value as a coach. Working at the high school level, I have had the opportunity to time hundreds of athletes. Timing sprints is great to see how athletes are performing and gives them perspective on their abilities.

During my first year at the high school, before I began working with the football team, the starting running back tore his ACL. I tested him in the off-season, after he had recovered from his ACL tear, and found his 40-yd dash time to be less than stellar: 5.28. That is a below-average speed for a starting varsity running back. I explained to him that this was an area in which he needed to improve and that he had not had a carry over 20 yards the previous season, nor did he score any touchdowns. That athlete ended up training at a private facility that performed zero speed work in training.

Flash forward to his senior year, his 40-yd dash time barely improved to a slightly-less-slow 5.23. He lost his starting role to a sophomore who had been training with me for the previous two years and ran a 4.87 40-yard dash. Not blazing fast, but a very respectable time for a 16-year-old in a small school.

Visual feedback is one of the best tools for me and my athletes, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

Even though I have a fully automatic timing system, I still like to film my athletes’ reps from time to time. Visual feedback is one of the best tools for me and my athletes. A high school lineman sprinting with excessive butt-kick and over-reaching is hard to cue simultaneously, and it may be even harder for them to understand what I’m trying to explain.

Filming the rep and showing them what I see and what I want them to change or focus on has made technical improvements happen much quicker than before. It still takes time and patience but change happens sooner with visual feedback.

Unrealistic Training Expectations

Training high school athletes means you have to deal with parents. Parents have very high expectations and sometimes even unrealistic ones. If you train athletes outside of school for money, these assessments are essential for evaluating the athlete to show exactly what their abilities are. It is important to compare the athlete to other athletes their age, but also to collegiate athletes so the parents can understand which physical qualities are necessary to compete at the next level.

If the athlete’s profile is not great, be positive with the parents and athlete, but also realistic. Sometimes an ego can be crushed but it is our job to turn that into motivation.

Athletes and parents alike need to understand that training is a long process. If they come to you as a sophomore hoping to play in college, you have time to improve their athleticism with smart training, but nothing significant will change after a month. If things don’t improve after a few months, then please do something different in your training.

Try not to rely on hand timing or using your timing system incorrectly, so times will not be inflated, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

Follow the best protocol that the equipment offers and, as previously stated, make sure it is precise and reliable. Try not to rely on hand timing or using your timing system incorrectly, so times will not be inflated. Now more than ever, social media has given us absurd fly-10s and 40-yard dashes at the high school level; all that does is give your athletes a false representation of their actual abilities. Buying a timing system is not to fuel egos or post social media videos for the sake of it—use it to collect accurate data to evaluate athletes.

Jump Testing

Jump testing is a good way to determine jumping ability, but also lower body power and elasticity. I personally like measuring a squat jump, counter movement jump with hands on hips, counter movement jump with arms, and RSI.

A lot of jumping test results I see on social media are inflated due to athletes understanding how to cheat the test by manipulating their body to increase flight time and delay landing. Make sure your athletes understand the directions before they jump. A squat jump should not have any counter movement or that will inflate numbers as well.

Don’t worry if you cannot afford a jump mat or force plate. Carlos Balasobre-Fernandez is the creator of My Jump 2, an inexpensive app that uses the camera of your smart device to film and analyze vertical jumps, horizontal jumps, RSI, force velocity profiling, and right-left asymmetry jumps.

I like testing both legs separately to gather information to see if there may be a huge asymmetry present. This could provide valuable information that a limb is at risk for injury. The app has been proven to be reliable and objective in research and is a fraction of the price compared to jump mats and force plates. All that is required is a smart phone with a camera and a couple leg measurements of the athlete, and you can collect jump data.

Obviously not many sports require great jumping abilities to be successful. Jump testing will be more important for basketball and volleyball, but the information gathered from jump testing is still important. Jump tests can track athletes’ readiness as well. But maybe the most important guideline for jump testing is making sure the athletes are giving 100% effort.

The most important guideline for jump testing is making sure the athletes are giving 100% effort, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

Over-testing jumping abilities could become monotonous and boring, leaving the athlete to appear as if they are not improving when they might just be lacking motivation. Read the room; if the energy isn’t there to collect good jump data then reschedule it for another day.

Fitness Testing

Fitness testing is a way to measure if the athlete’s energy system is robust enough to keep up with the demands of the sport. There are several different fitness tests that field sports can use to evaluate this. Football requires a different level of fitness than soccer, and this can be analyzed even deeper by breaking down the demands per position.

A few similar and popular tests include the shuttle run beep test, yo-yo intermittent tests, and 30:15 intermittent fitness tests. These named tests have shown reliability in closely predicting maximal aerobic speed. At the very least, this test gives a good indication that the person has the fitness or running speed necessary to compete in intermittent field sport.

Think of these intermittent fitness tests as showing how fast an athlete can run in-game versus the linear speed test which shows how fast the athlete is capable of running. Some will debate whether these test results truly test aerobic capacity or just the ability to run shuttles with short rest periods. These tests are not perfect; for instance, some athletes who can achieve higher sprinting velocities can do well on this test even if their fitness or aerobic capacity may not be stellar.

Martin Bucheit has an app named 30-15 IFT, which essentially talks the test-taker through the test. It works best if connected to a speaker that can be brought to the field. Athletes can listen to directions as they complete the test. The app is free and is available for iOS and Android.

A popular test I see at the high school level right now (and one I do think has merit), is the simple 1.5-mile run test. I think it is a fair assessment of aerobic capacity during running. If an athlete performs poorly, it might be a sign that they cannot sustain a decent running speed for an extended period of time.

A lot of people think a test like this will kill an athlete’s sprinting velocity and that all their hard work during off-season speed training will be a waste. To this I say: it is just a single test. Most team sport athletes need to be able to maintain the skill of running for an extended period of time. If running 1.5 miles makes you as a coach or your athletes nervous, then they may be out of shape.

Show Your Value

Coaches usually know if they are making a meaningful contribution to their school or athletes. Making a large positive impact means you have value. But do other coaches know that about you yet? If the answer isn’t definitively yes, then it’s time to change how you go about things.

When I first started out at the high school level, coaches just thought I was there to teach kids to lift weights. They were confused when I would take them outside for speed training. Now they understand the real impact I can bring to their teams. Coaches seeing their players power, speed, and conditioning increase each year on paper is great, but when they also see it translate to game play is when you gain the coaches’ trust for real.

Set yourself apart by using technology to improve the way you record data and gather information. The technology and apps suggested in this article are tools that I have used successfully. Technology should not create headaches or create more questions than answers. Make sure you are collecting the data you want to collect.

Set yourself apart by using technology to improve the way you record data and gather information, says @KCPerformance_. Share on X

Freelap has given me the ability to gather information quickly and efficiently while the inexpensive apps have helped me collect important data I thought I couldn’t collect without expensive equipment. These suggestions have been a game changer for me and my athletes. New technology has made assessing my athletes easier than ever.

Work With Your Coach

What do you get when you combine all these assessments? Despite the small budget, a pretty solid evaluation of athletes’ strengths and weaknesses. You can even create diagrams and athlete profiles to show the coach so they can fully understand the meaning of the results and what to do with them moving forward. If a coach accepts your offer to perform the testing battery, it is a sign that they’re probably open-minded and willing to hear your feedback.

Don’t forget to retest these qualities to evaluate how the season is affecting certain physical qualities and report back to the coach. Great coaches understand how to smoothly embed testing in practices during the on- and off-season without it feeling forced. Seeing positive results after retesting makes sport coaches happy and gives you the opportunity to continue to work with the team.

Remember to evaluate your demands of the sport before choosing these assessments. Use what is useful to your sport and ditch what is not relevant.

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

Derived from the work of Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky, the terms intensive and extensive have increasingly been applied in the programming of plyometrics. These two labels are used to categorize plyometric movements by the intensity those movements yield on the body.

While this can be very useful in providing coaches with a way to categorize these movements, it becomes pretty obvious when we divide up our training that smaller, less impactful movements can be done at a much higher volume than our high-impact (shock method) variations. The split starts and ends there when it comes to categorizing plyometric movements, but with such an array and variety in plyometric landings, questions arise.

From my own coaching and research experience with plyometrics, this framework is not enough to provide others with the tools to build a program around dynamic movement development. Below are five reasons that explain why this is the case.

It becomes pretty obvious when we divide up our training that smaller, less impactful movements can be done at a much higher volume than our high-impact (shock method) variations. Share on X

1. How Do We Determine “Intense”?

The intensive vs. extensive divide derives from a split between shock methods (depth jumps) and what Verkhoshansky termed “low-impact” plyometrics, where the angular vector of force effort has more horizontal coupling than the vertical angular vector of high-impact plyometrics. Interestingly, some research has suggested vertical angular forced movements don’t always produce higher-intensity landings than their horizontal counterpart¹.

Do you know the difference in ground reaction force (GRF) between a depth jump and continuous hops? 

Coaches and athletes need to understand the differences in landing forces when it comes to different angles of momentum and how that influences landing forces and loading patterns.

Potential issues with the split in angular momentum:

• Research suggests that hopping (unilateral landings on the same leg) has significantly high GRF², but in some cases is deemed extensive.
• Unilateral and bilateral differences are overlooked when comparing the two movements mentioned above.
• Ground contact times (GCTs) aren’t considered half as often as GRF among coaches when plyos are divided between intensive and extensive. Highly dynamic movements such as bounding or leaping (bilateral landings) can possess very short GCTs, which in turn could be due to the effective coupling through the musculotendinous unit (MTU). This subsequently also produces very high GRF that could be deemed intensive! To an extent, it is difficult to drive fast GCTs without delivering high GRFs.

2. Differences in Athlete Type

Differences between athletes can play a major role in how they deal with exercise intensity.

• Neurally driven athletes may find locomotive plyometrics like bounding for distance relatively easy on the body, but also find vertical angular-driven movements such as depth jumps very intense.
• Concentrically driven athletes will tend to be the opposite, finding force expression easier on them than high volumes of more locomotive horizontal plyometrics.

2.1. The Unilateral and Bilateral Divide 

Similar to athlete typing, there can be a potential divide in how athletes execute unilateral and bilateral landings.

• I have often seen (but it’s not always the case) that concentrically driven athletes will favor bilateral movements such as leaping (bilateral landing and takeoff) due to longer push-off phases.
• Neurally driven athletes may prefer unilateral landings that cover ground, as they’re able to utilize more tendon reflexes stored in the series elastic component (SEC), as opposed to longer muscular contracting movements.

Note: This may not be the case with all of these athlete types, as some will just optimize their landing strategies to best fit their type (for example, neural athletes may utilize a much shorter coupling effect for optimal jump height during a depth jump).

With the examples above, we have an athlete who is well adapted for this intensive and extensive format, while the other may struggle to get the training exposure you programmed for. Therefore, the phrases “intensive” and “extensive” plyometrics become hard to use when two athletes might experience different responses from the same stimulus.

3. Breaking Down the Variety Among Extensive Plyometrics

Although there are issues with the intensive category, coaches should find it simple to recognize that it should only include movements in around the top 10% of highly demanding landings, often with the highest GRFs.

The extensive side can become very broad in that it fills the other majority of “plyometric” movements under the top percentile of intensive plyos. This therefore leaves us with some relatively intense movements as seen below:

Video 1. Ping: Hops for distance

Video 2. Light: Leaps — at the other end of the spectrum!

As you can see in the two videos, these movements are significantly different in landing forces and GCT.  It is understandable that you can use less-intense movements to expose athletes to a higher-volume stimulus, but ask yourself these questions:

• How intense are these movements I’m using for each individual?
• How close are they kinematically to the intensive plyometrics I’m programming?
• Most importantly, am I using the same volume for both extensive examples?

These questions should help you select and program the appropriate movements to elicit the training adaptations that you wish for. In my opinion, if you are not posing these questions, the potential for issues to arise will increase. Being critical of every layer of your training could be the difference between a well-timed peaking phase and tipping over the edge into potential injury.

Being critical of every layer of your training could be the difference between a well-timed peaking phase and tipping over the edge into potential injury, says @mcinneswatson. Share on X

4. Intent

Intent is an important factor to consider when you’re dividing intensive and extensive movements. Usually, when an athlete has established a considerable background of plyometrics, they develop greater pre-activation methods that can increase their capacity to drive intent with dynamic landings.

Inexperienced athletes lack the neural control and skills learned from thousands of landings. This often shows when athletes are striving for maximal height and/or distance but end up stamping the ground (which tends to bleed all the force they’re producing into the ground, equaling longer GCTs and poor concentric output) or being highly tentative and absorbing most of the forces through joint distortion. Both types of inexperienced athletes struggle to control intent not only within their landings, but with all dynamic ground strikes.

Remember: All movements considered “plyometric” are highly dynamic and do not come without high force and shock upon the body, so make sure your athletes are well prepared before cueing for any kind of maximal intent.

The skills athletes need to learn to deliver the intent you need for dynamic landings are:

• Heightened landing precision for foot placement.
• Increased joint stiffening speed = faster coupling of eccentric to concentric phase.
• Subsequent faster GCT.
• Greater locomotive capacity to maintain velocity and/or utilize force.

With the skills and ability to deliver greater intent, many extensive movements can become very intense. Examples below show the same movement in two very different variations.

Video 3. Light: Hops. As you can see, this unilateral landing pattern shows small, cyclical landing with relatively low GRF (typical extensive plyometric).

Video 4. Ping: Fast Hop – High Hop. This variation shows a fast, accelerated hop to initiate a highly loaded eccentric phase to the second landing, propelling the athlete vertically. There is a significantly higher GRF and loading pattern through the lower extremities and posterior chain (typical extensive plyometric).

The second variation (Ping: Fast Hop – High Hop) clearly has the potential to be very intense in nature due to the driven intent of the fast hop to deliver a much faster eccentric loading rate (something typically found in hopping: unilateral, unipedal landings). If an athlete is ill-prepared to deliver this kind of intent, then a whole host of issues can arise. So, when you have extensive movements that are programmed for intent, consider the differences and level of development required for this so-called “submaximal” movement.

5. Issues with Extensive to Intensive Programming

The typical strategy of implementing plyometrics with the extensive and intensive divide is to move exactly in that way: Mapping the year out to start with extensive and become more intensive, often with a general to specific strategy as athletes gets closer to competition.

While this is logical, in some cases (beginners or underdeveloped athletes) we have a large cohort of athletes being subjected to the plyometric version of the long to short sprinting model that coaches are now critical of. As we garner further evidence year on year that suggests specificity to our events (or in this case, GRFs, GCTs, and multiple other specific parameters we see during competition) is critical and often requires regular programming throughout the year, we must question these ideologies.

If we use the extensive to intensive model, then similar issues that appeared in sprinting with the long to short model may arise. Where some athletes may thrive off this kind of programming, the diversity of the athletic population may mean other methods are more suitable. There are obviously many ways in which you can program plyometrics, but it is worth considering the impact of a regular insert of more intensive movements. If sprinting and speed models consider the value of sprinting at specifically high speeds regularly, then why would plyometrics be any different—especially when sprinting is deemed plyometric?

If sprinting and speed models consider the value of sprinting at specifically high speeds regularly, then why would plyometrics be any different—especially when sprinting is deemed plyometric? Share on X

Note: The general to specific methods are valuable, as you can subject the athlete to competition-specific loading patterns and GCTs without it being event specific. For example, a long jumper can use bilateral landings and still evoke intense stress on the lower extremities.

Okay, well, where next? What’s the solution to a better way of categorizing plyometrics?

Revisit my previous SimpliFaster post, Plyometric Training Systems: Developmental vs. Progressive. That article illustrates a great way to break down landing dynamics into four simple categories that you can supplement within any phase of training throughout the year to develop everything from reactivity and elasticity to mobility and stability. You will notice that most will be deemed extensive or Verkhoshansky’s “horizontal angular momentum” movements, and that none of the tiers are “shock method,” per se. Understand that the ping and medium tiers elicit great GRFs in very short time frames, and when performed unilaterally can warrant high stress upon the MTU. Movements like ping tier speed hops also drive a higher level of specificity toward events such as sprinting and locomotion during sport, which is arguably not seen in a bilateral depth jump.

I hope that these are some questions you can now ask about your plyometrics programming and whether you’ll tread carefully along the intensive and extensive divide. There is more to this training method then just fast and slow or heavy and light.

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. Mero, A. and Komi, P.V. “EMG, force, and power analysis of sprint-specific strength exercises.” Journal of Applied Biomechanics. 1994;10(1):1-13.

2. Perttunen, J., Kyrolainen, H., Komi, P.V. and Heinonen, A. “Biomechanical loading in the triple jump.” Journal of Sports Sciences. 2000;18(5):363-370.

Volleyball is a sport that requires several different levels of physical skills, including speed, power, change of direction, agility, and strength as well as the ability to repeat those movements. In order to play the sport at a high level, skills aside, you need to have a training plan in the off-season to develop each of these qualities.

In the article below, I’ll show you how to map out a training program, both sprinting and lifting, including examples of programs I have used over my six years training volleyball players.

Warmup and Observation

Before I get into the main focus of the workout, I want to quickly go over what I have coined the Ignition Series. We start each lift with some variation of the following:

• • Breathing Drills/Reflexive Performance Reset

 

• • Spring Ankle Concepts/Foot Activation

 

• • Marches/Skips/Prances

 

• • High Knees

 

There is nothing groundbreaking here, but I found following this outline prepared my athletes for the activities ahead better than any traditional dynamic warmup has. Not only do I think it’s a great series to improve performance, but you can learn a lot just by observing an athlete during these exercises.

I look to see how fluid the athlete moves during all these exercises as being able to observe athlete movement is one of the best assessments we have. It is skill to be able to relax during movement, so we put a big emphasis on this during this period.

Being able to observe athlete movement is one of the best assessments we have. It is skill to be able to relax during movement, says @bigk28. Share on X

Another important movement I am looking for is dorsiflexion of the foot when the foot comes up from striking the ground. It is a bad habit that when the knee comes up to have the foot in an improper position (inactive foot). The athlete loses a lot of the power of having that foot dorsiflexed ready to rapidly attack the ground. Keep an eye on this because this is very common amongst all team sport athletes that I have worked with.

Other movements I am looking for from my athletes is for them to be actively punching the ground from the middle to front part of the foot. Way too often, I see athletes strike the ground with the heel, which is detrimental to improving speed.

Athletes need to be aggressive in all these movements and by teaching them to punch the ground as opposed to just lifting their knee, they will get a better training effect. Switch your dynamic warmup to the ignition series and you will see a significant change in your athlete’s readiness.

Video 1. A hurdle mobility routine is easy to do before a lift in order to prepare players for the movements scheduled. Pick a couple of movements, such as the ones in this video, and complete anywhere from 5 to 10 reps focusing on good postural positions.

Acceleration

Acceleration, power, and movement in short spaces are key in the sport of volleyball. When looking at acceleration training, look no further than Al Vermeil’s chart found in Carl Valle’s ‘Kinetics Manual’.

In this chart, Vermeil covers different exercises and their direct effects on different areas of sprinting. These are my following go-to exercises when looking to improve an athlete’s acceleration capabilities and the order I use them in when constructing a workout. As you will notice, they progress in a way that prepares the athlete for the highest-intensity activity:

1. Med Ball Throws: There are so many variations to use, but I like anything where total body movement is being incorporated. My go-to med ball exercises are underhand backward, underhand forward, and push press, as well as anything rotational. As in warmups, you will see during med ball throws which of your athletes are violent in their movements. I teach my athletes to rapidly load and fire that ball as far as they can, like an approach jump during competition.

Athletes that struggle with rapidly loading and concentrically firing will struggle with acceleration and those that can’t accelerate in volleyball will struggle. Even my strongest athletes have shown huge struggles with med ball exercises and I think this limits their overall ability to be strong at accelerating. I usually aim for two-to-three sets of four-to-five reps for all my med ball exercises.

2. Plyometrics: To me, all plyometric work needs to have a theme. If acceleration and strength are your primary objectives, use the following parameters:

• • Single or double leg
  • Deep to middle position in a counter movement
  • Pauses
  • Weighted

• I like to use these drills when I am specifically working on acceleration development. I will, more times than not, pair an unweighted movement that has a pause with a loaded movement. Remember, the goal here is to improve strength levels that affect acceleration, so the load for the weighted movements should be significant.

Form should never take a hit, but by my calculations you should see greater than an 80% detriment if you are looking to affect acceleration. For instance, if an athlete has a 20-inch vertical, you will need to find a load where the athlete is jumping four inches or less. A common pairing I will choose is a two-second paused SL maximum-effort jump with trap bar jumps, for three sets of four reps.

3. Resisted Sprints: There are several avenues to take with resisted sprinting, but the ones I enjoy the most are hill sprints and sled-resisted sprints. I like to make sure the players are well-rested between reps, so the goal is 100% effort the entire distance of the rep. That should be almost common sense if the goal is to improve acceleration, but more often than not I see coaches get frazzled because their athletes are standing around, and they turn what was supposed to be an acceleration-based workout into a conditioning session.

• When looking at sled work, I usually look to keep the sled weight range to 30% and below of the athlete’s bodyweight. I have seen with weighted sled sprints, athletes self-correct with their technique. If you have poor technique with a heavier resisted sled, you will struggle to move the load.

Always start with a lower amount of reps and weight and see how the athlete’s times are responding. I usually start in the six-rep range for 10-yard accelerations. As the weeks go on, I will add in more reps and start increasing the distance to 20 yards.

4. Timed Accelerations: This should be a staple for everyone in their training, but you should constantly be timing your athletes in their 5/10/20-yard sprints. Not only does it make the athletes extremely competitive amongst one another, but it truly helps inspire people to give maximum effort. At the end of the day, no athlete wants to be the slow athlete.

Outside of pure motivation, it gives you a great indication as a coach on how your training is impacting each athlete. If things are continuing to trend in the right direction, stick with the plan. Not everyone will improve their accelerations every single time you measure it, otherwise they would turn into Olympic-level sprinters. We are just looking for trends in the data so we can make changes to our program when necessary.

Video 2. Resisted sprints, including hill sprints, have a huge carryover to acceleration, particularly the first 5-10m (which is important for volleyball). Couple this with med ball work and a well rounded lifting program and you have the tools you need to improve acceleration.

Bottom line, although volleyball success has a huge part to do with skill and reactiveness, if you are proficient at acceleration and you have the prerequite skills, you will have a higher likelihood of success.

Maximum Velocity

I work with 23 different sports, and I have yet to find one where the fastest team doesn’t have a distinct advantage. Speed dominates in every sport and usually the teams that are the fastest are also compromised of the better athletes.

Even though acceleration plays king in the sport of volleyball, maximum velocity plays a huge role in the development of the athlete, says @bigk28. Share on X

Even though acceleration plays king in the sport of volleyball, maximum velocity plays a huge role in the development of the athlete. When looking at designing a program for a volleyball player, you must include both acceleration and maximum velocity training.

Video 3. Although volleyball players will never be in a position where they are moving at max velocity, training max velocity still provides a ton of benefits that carry over to their sport. Using such tools as wickets and fly 10’s will help train and assess how your players’ max velocity is improving. In theory, if our max velocity is improving, so is our acceleration: a quality very important in the sport of volleyball.

I know many coaches that will say that if an athlete never hits maximum velocity in a game, they won’t waste the time working on it. I think there are several benefits of training at top speeds that will never be accomplished with acceleration-based work only. Three key factors as to why I think training maximum velocity is a necessity for all sports:

1. 1. The speed and forces the body produces at maximum velocity will never be matched during any other training stimulus. I know in Ken Clark’s research about forces at top speed, he said Olympic-level athletes hit somewhere in the range of five times their bodyweight. We must treat maximum velocity sprints as an exercise to improve athleticism.

 

1. 1. Research shows that sprinting at maximum velocity is the best exercise for hamstring health. The best availability is availability, so including maximum velocity sprints should be a staple when trying to keep your athletes healthy.

 

1. A sprint done at maximum velocity requires rhythm, coordination, and relaxation; this is also true during other athletic movements. While this is anecdotal, I have rarely seen a high-functioning athlete whose body was in a constant state of stress and tension.

Running a longer-distance sprint and working on body control and movements will carry over to relaxation during other athletic movements. This has just been my eye test and not something I have the research to back up but to me it makes a lot of sense that a more relaxed athlete makes for a more productive athlete.

I have rarely seen a high-functioning athlete whose body was in a constant state of stress and tension, says @bigk28. Share on X

When measuring peak velocity, I have seen one common trend: our volleyball athletes who performed the best in the Flying 10 also had the best acceleration scores, jumped the highest in both their vertical and broad jump tests, and showed the best repeated power scores during the Scandinavian Rebound Jump Test (looking at reactive strength index).

While some may think a Flying 10 isn’t the best test for acceleration-based athletes, it does give you another piece of the puzzle in terms of an athletic profile. I also believe it gives you another valuable piece of your assessment tool. If you have an athlete who has the fastest Flying 10 on the team but one of the worst acceleration/power profiles, acceleration work should probably be most of the focus. Here are a few of my go-to exercises when I am trying to improve our volleyball athletes’ peak velocity.

1. Bounding: I consider bounding in the category of reactive-based plyometric; in other words, a plyometric where you are working on a brief load followed by an explosive movement with as little ground contact as possible, covering as much distance or height as possible.

• This is a higher-level movement so you might have to break it down into simpler movements such as skips or single movements before you progress to

bounding.

The good thing about bounding is that you can progress the sets, reps, and distance in order to elicit a different response. Some of my favorite bounding exercises include speed bounds, single leg bounds, bounds for distance, straight leg bounds etc. I would start with two sets of 20 yards of repetitions and progress from there.

2. Wicket Sprints: This drill is traditionally used to improve the sprint mechanics with field sport or track athletes who hit peak speed frequently throughout their competition, but remember the goal for our purposes isn’t to improve technique at maximum velocity, but rather to help improve the top speed we move at. Moving at a faster speed means we are putting more force into the ground, meaning we will have a greater carryover to other athletic movements.

• You don’t have to look cool and use actual hurdles; simply use cones and have athletes run on the side if they aren’t fit exactly to their stride length. You want a one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to wickets, otherwise you will spend an obscene amount of time figuring out individual wicket differences.

I like to do wicket sprints with cones mapped out for acceleration as well, since most athletes struggle with technical cues during acceleration. You are killing two birds with one stone when you have the athletes giving maximum effort and practicing good sprint habits for both acceleration and maximum velocity.

3. 3. In and Out’s: This drill is accomplished by having your athletes sprint to maximum velocity, followed by a distance with a drop in the intensity, then an increase in intensity over another distance. Again, not directly relatable to the sport itself, but I believe that by improving maximum velocity we are improving qualities that will carry over specifically to the sport of volleyball.

 

3. Timed Maximum Velocity Sprints: This is the same concept as the above-mentioned timed sprints in acceleration. Time your sprints, relay the scores, and rank your athletes amongst one another. Athletes love feedback and want to know where they stand. Once again they aren’t going to hit PR’s every workout, but over time you should see progress.

I know some coaches love the term “sport specificity,” but to me, anything that will positively impact the physical attributes of my players is beneficial.

I know some coaches love the term *sport specificity,* but to me, anything that will positively impact the physical attributes of my players is beneficial, says @bigk28. Share on X

There is a huge correlation between maximum velocity and other characteristics that are related to volleyball. I have seen athletes improve their Fly 10 time, while simultaneously improving their strength levels, vertical jump, reactive strength index, and repeated broad jump.

We must use maximum velocity as another training stimulus: if you are taking out said stimulus, you are limiting the ceiling on the players’ athletic development.

Conditioning

I believe a majority of your “playing shape” preparation should come from high-intensity practice. However, that doesn’t mean that you should completely neglect the aerobic/repeat alactic quality.

I read years ago in Buddy Morris’s book on football preparation that football is primarily driven by two systems: aerobic and alactic. I believe volleyball is very similar. Buddy’s description gives you a very simplistic approach for a very complicated and intertwining system.

Video 4. Constantly be re-assessing your athletes and determining where the program needs to be tailored to fit their specific needs. The contract grid, by Musclelab, is one of the best jump tools out there and allows you to measure all types of jumps. While the regular vertical jump provides value on improvements in vertical power, the Scandanvian Rebound Jump Test gives you a bunch of data including reactive strength index (RSI).

The alactic system controls the jumps, accelerations, and all fast-moving actions, while the aerobic system feeds in the recovery of that system so athletes can repeat those actions over and over again. Here are some of my go-to modalities for conditioning the volleyball athlete:

1. Tempo Runs: There are many benefits for tempo runs, including working on running efficiency, but for the purpose of this article, I think it helps develop an aerobic base. Tempo runs are exactly what they sound like; runs done at 70-75% intensity with the main goal being to build a base before moving on to other higher-intensity movements. I am still preaching good sprint mechanics—upright body position, foot strike under the body, good arm action, and neutral head position—but the main goal is to accumulate volume over the weeks of training.

• Some sports will do longer tempos, but I don’t believe it is necessary for volleyball to go over 50 meters (or midfield on a normal football field) per rep in their tempo runs. I follow each tempo run rep with a 50 meter recovery walk.

The rest here should not be overlooked; volleyball is a fast-moving sport with little recovery (somewhere from 16 to 20 seconds). The ability to recover faster than your opponent is a critical one. In between reps, I tell the athletes to focus on their breathing to bring their body back to a state of calm. I’ll start at 1200-1400 meters and make my way up to 1800-2000 meters total per workout.

2. Lifting Circuits: These are pretty general circuits where am I having my athletes working with less than 50% load (I just tell to them to pick a relatively easy load) and perform for three-to-four sets of maximum repetitions in 30 seconds.

I will always start with a lower body movement to start the workout (5-10 rep range depending on the day and movement), followed by an Olympic movement used to reinforce good positioning before the circuit. I usually pair the following exercises to make a tri-set circuit: upper body push, upper body pull, and accessory.

3. EDT Lifting Circuits: The best description I’ve heard of EDT circuits from Cal Dietz is that they are designed to condition power sport athletes. That is exactly how I utilize them with my volleyball athletes. I usually pick three primary movements from this set: squat/deadlift, clean/snatch, and dumbbell horizontal/vertical push.

I set the load at roughly 70-75% of our one-rep maximum and we go for a set amount of reps, performing singles of each exercise, trying to finish as fast as possible. I really love this to develop work capacity under load, or as a reload day following a central nervous system high/low routine. I have seen athletes significantly improve their work capacity by doing this type of workout two times a week.

Volleyball is a fast-moving sport with little recovery (somewhere from 16 to 20 seconds). The ability to recover faster than your opponent is a critical one, says @bigk28. Share on X

Strength Training

Strength training has a huge impact in three main areas: setting the foundation for training other qualities, health and resiliency, and mass-specific force.

Strength has a huge carryover to acceleration, which tells me that my volleyball athletes need to be strong. My parameters for strength include loads heavier than 85% or less than .4-.5 m/s, depending on your athlete.

We spend a good part of the off-season working on strength. If your athletes aren’t strong, you are asking for trouble when they reach the demanding in-season schedule. My athletes usually play three games per week, and with that workload you are risking injuries and declining performance.

I think this where the outline of your lifting program is of the utmost importance. A lot of coaches put a number in their head for where their athletes need their strength to be and for some, that number may never be achievable in their career. So coaches spend years chasing numbers that will never be obtained and in essence miss out on developing other qualities in their lifting program.

Coaches have also wrongly correlated improvement in strength numbers as a way to assess their programs’ effectiveness. There are several problems with this, especially if the coach doesn’t have the highest integrity when performing maximum testing with their strength-based lifts.

I know most of the time people just want the recipe, but the truth is, each athlete is so different, there is no generic plan I could give you. I could have an athlete that comes in with a strong training background, and with traditional strength development, and they might make little progress on their maximum strength.

However, if you have an athlete that has little training background, strength work will continue to develop them holistically as an athlete. It can take up to two years to develop a base of strength, but it can pay off in other ways.

For example, during this period of strength development, I have seen my athletes simultaneously improve their acceleration (10/20 yard sprint), change of direction and power output (vertical/broad jump).

For our off-season programming (far out from the season) we will have three general prep blocks (aerobic, lactate, anaerobic) followed by three maximum strength blocks. Again, with a more experienced athlete you may have to change the plan to address any deficiencies. With that being said, I believe all athletes need to build a base with general prep work as well as retrain the eccentric and isometric qualities. From there, you can start to design blocks specifically for your athlete’s needs.

With this general program outline, I have seen all physical qualities improve throughout the entire year. More importantly, we have seen virtually no games missed throughout the course of each season.

Once an athlete has become ‘strong enough’ you can make the lifts more specific to the qualities you want to impact. For example, I have seen full seasons where athletes do mostly speed work in the weight room to supplement our acceleration/speed work.

Video 5. Olympic lifts are effective for developing power, while teaching eccentric absorption and kinesthetic awareness. Don’t be afraid to go overhead with your athletes, as we get strong posterior development with movements like the snatch.

I think everyone still benefits from GPP, eccentric, and isometric work, but where you go after that depends on your athlete. These are the main movements we focus on throughout the year:

1. Squat variation
2. Deadlift variation
3. Safety bar split squat
4. Clean variation
5. Snatch variation
6. Bench variation
7. Olympic push variations

The sport doesn’t limit the athlete, rather the history of each athlete should determine the restrictions of the program. There will be times when certain things may need to be restricted based on injuries or ailments, but if you are extremely limiting your athlete in the weight room, then I struggle to see how that athlete will stay healthy throughout the course of an entire year.

As I mentioned earlier, the best ability for an athlete is availability, and lifting plays a huge role in keeping your athletes healthy, especially in a sport with such repetitive upper- and lower-body movements. Not only does lifting play a huge role in reducing the risk of injury, it also sets the foundation for developing all other qualities. Bryan Mann once said, and I paraphrase, if you skip out on developing strength, you will limit the potential of developing all other qualities.

If you skip out on developing strength, you will limit the potential of developing all other qualities, says @bigk28. Share on X

The best read of my entire career has been The Triphasic Manual by Cal Dietz and Ben Peterson. It is scientifically backed with the rationale needed to make outstanding progress in the weight room. I have used it for the last several years and have seen nothing but incredible results with regards to strength, speed, and power in a timely manner with my athletes.

Cal talks about undulation, but with a slight twist. Instead of traditional undulation where the volume drops as the intensity increases, we switch the days and approaches to each day.

Athletes usually coming back from a long weekend and then aren’t at their prime, so they need what I call a ‘primer day,’ with a moderate load with some medium volume to ‘activate’ the body for the week. After the body goes through that primer day, it is ready for the heaviest load of the week with the lowest amount of volume. The last day of the week is reserved for the lowest load with the highest volume, giving the athletes 72 hours to recover before the next training.

With a beginner, you will experience progress no matter what program, but as your athlete becomes more experienced, they will need a more specific program. The program can be one of three blocks: strength, power, or speed. Depending on your assessment, you will see which one of these your athletes need the most and in what end of the spectrum they need to work on.

There are several methods to use, but I primarily use the 10/20 yard sprint as well as the countermovement jump vs. pause squat jump to see where my athletes need the specific focus. If I have a beginner athlete, they will progress through these qualities in order.

Video 6. Squats are a great tool to develop lower body strength in all athletes. If a player is new to training, you should continue to see improvements in power and speed as their squat continues to improve.

Each training block should have a specific theme. As Cal talks about, the body will respond better when it is presented with one specific stimulus (i.e. a training block dedicated to strength). Presenting the body with several different stimuli forces the body to adapt to them all at the same time, never really excelling at any.

Presenting the body with several different stimuli forces the body to adapt to them all at the same time, never really excelling at any, says @bigk28. Share on X

Serve and Hitting Speed

One of the more important metrics to assess and track with your volleyball program is serving speed. I labeled this section for both serve and hitting speed because if you train for a faster serving velocity, that will carry over to hitting. This is important because the team that has the faster serving speed will be the more challenging team to serve-receive against.

The speed reserve concept for sprinting comes into play here as well. Volleyball players may take anywhere from 60-120 swings in one given match. Not only is that a high volume of swings, but they usually must repeat this performance for several games spread throughout the week.

No matter how high your hitting speed, it will drop as the games start to pile up. Our off-season plan is to raise the ceiling on our hitting speed so we will still operate at a high level when we start to fatigue.

This test is relatively easy to perform. All you need is a radar gun. Personally, I use the Pocket Radar. I have the athletes perform five serves using their normal serve (standing float vs jump float vs topspin) with the radar gun positioned behind them. Only measure the serves that land in bounds as serves blasted at the back wall at high speeds are of little value.

Your lifting plan will have a big impact on how much serving speed will improve from year to year. I have seen serve speed improve by following a total body training protocol. I think it goes without saying that the more powerful you are the harder you will hit the ball, but a big factor of training I want to dive into further is training the upper body, a hotly-debated topic for overhead athletes.

Training the Upper Body

In my six years working with volleyball players, we have had ZERO upper body injuries. For an overhead sport, that is outstanding. Here are my go-to movements for developing the upper body, making your volleyball athletes more powerful and durable:

1. Olympic Lifting: Olympic lifting has a strong carryover to acceleration, so we clean and snatch all year long with our volleyball athletes. Most of the work we do is singles, but if we are doing a teaching phase, we will go all the way up to four reps.

• I will not go into the specifics of the

benefits of Olympic lifting

because the list is massive, but I believe we get good development of the upper back and posterior shoulder when performing the Olympic lifts year-round. Also, teaching the body to absorb a large amount of force eccentrically is something not many other exercises can do.

2. Horizontal Pushing: Horizontal pushing is a staple movement we perform all year. Everything we do is low volume, one-to-three reps, depending on the emphasis of the block. There are no restrictions here. People often forget how important horizontal pressing (as well as vertical) is, not only for upper body strength and power, but also for stability of the shoulder overhead (i.e. serratus and pec complex). My go-to horizontal pushing exercises are:

• • Barbell bench (regular, close grip, incline)
  • Dumbbell bench (regular, floor press, incline)
  • Pushups (weighted or unweighted)
  • Medicine ball pushes

3. Horizontal Pulling: You want your overhead athletes to be strong pullers. The rule of thumb I use is that whatever we are pressing, we should be able to at least pull the same load. If you want your athletes to stay healthy, you need a well-developed posterior chain and horizontal pulling will be a big weapon in your arsenal. My go-to horizontal pulling exercises are:

• • Pendlay row
  • Barbell row (pronated and supinated)
  • Dumbbell row (standing and chest-supported)
  • Cable row

4. Vertical Pushing: We do vertical pushing exercises all year as well. We do primarily two vertical pushing exercises throughout the week: Olympic-based and strength-based. Volleyball is a sport that requires synchronization between the lower and upper body to perform movements at a high level. I think Olympic overhead movements check all these boxes. Use the same concept here as the other pressing movements—high loads and low volume. This is our overhead Olympic movement progression:

• • Push press
  • Power jerk
  • Split jerk

5. Vertical Pulling: As with horizontal presses and pulls, we will do a vertical push paired with a vertical pull. I like my athletes to do most of the work with a supinated or neutral grip in-season to relieve the stress on the shoulder, but in our off-season we do everything under the sun with regards to vertical pulling. Chin-ups are a staple throughout the year, and we aim to go from bodyweight to loaded for a low amount of reps. These are my staples for vertical pulling:

• • Chin-ups
  • Pull-ups
  • Banded pull down
  • Lat pull down
  • Supinated lat pulldown

6. Triceps/Biceps/Shoulder: When it comes to arm health, I believe the triceps, biceps, and shoulder play a huge role. However, I will not spend a ton of time programming to focus on these because I believe we hit a lot of these areas during our main movements. But if for some reason I feel like we need the accessory work, I will program any of the following:

• • Dumbbell skull crusher
  • Dumbbell hammer curl
  • Dumbbell supinated curl
  • Banded curl
  • Banded overhead triceps extension
  • Banded triceps extension
  • Face pulls
  • Band tears
  • Reverse flys
  • Banded shoulder series

 

Chasing Potential

Volleyball is an extremely versatile sport that requires a unique combination of speed, power, and strength. To maximize the potential of your volleyball athletes, you need a well-versed program that covers all areas that are required for success.

Train your athletes in both acceleration and peak velocity, as both will contribute to speed, rhythm and coordination on the court. Do not neglect the weight room, as strength sets the foundation of the house for all other athletic movements.

However, don’t be obsessed with chasing numbers. We are here to make the best volleyball athlete and it must be a fully encompassed program to accomplish such. If you follow the outline in this article, you will have the tools you need to maximize the potential of your athletes.

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

In Illinois, an alarming number of football coaches discourage participation in track. A sample conversation:

Sophomore football player sends a DM to his head football coach:

Would it be a bad idea to run track this season? I was looking forward to running this year, but I talked to Coach ***** and all he said was “out of sight, out of mind.” 

The Head Coach responds:

Your call. I tell guys: “if it’s a passion you can’t live without, then you should go out.” I don’t subscribe to the adage that track makes you faster, if that’s why you go out. It’s a totally different type of speed than what is needed in football. The biggest reason why juniors don’t play in our program is a lack of strength, not speed!

And so it goes—another football coach convinces a sophomore in high school to lift weights in the spring with that coded warning, out of sight, out of mind. The guy who said that should be fired and never allowed to coach again.

Why? Since 2017, 1292 high schools in Illinois produced only 936 Division I football players. Only 44% of those athletes ran track. By comparison, since 2017, Texas produced 3209 Division I football players. 71.5% ran track. Texas had more football commits run track (2371) than Illinois had D-I players (936). And it’s not getting any better in Illinois—in the class of 2021 (131 D-1 football commits), only 39% ran track.

When you look at the combined rosters of Alabama and Ohio State, 88% of the DBs, 83% of the WRs, and 75% of the RBs ran track. 61% of all the players on both rosters had a track background.

When you look at the combined rosters of Alabama and Ohio State, 88% of the DBs, 83% of the WRs, and 75% of the RBs ran track. 61% of all the players on both rosters had a track background. Share on X

Feed the Cats Meets the BCS

Like modern politics, football coaches live in echo chambers. Every football coach I know was a hard-working grinder as an athlete. The weight room was their sacred place. Most of them never won a race in their life, and when they think of running, they think of conditioning.

Every football coach loves fast players, but they see speed as a genetic trait. They love it…then neglect it. They hire big guys to serve as their strength and conditioning coaches. The University of Illinois just replaced their S&C coach. Their guy was a power lifter who would post pictures of his biceps while he bragged about the number of Illini football players who could bench 405 and clean 300 pounds. He also posted video clips of his athletes going through speed ladders with the hashtag #SlowFeetDontEat. The new Illini S&C guy goes by the name of “Tank.” Tank got married in a college weight room.

And so it goes.

Chris Korfist and I started the Track Football Consortium in 2015. Our mission was to bring track coaches and football coaches together for the benefit of athletes. The goal was to help football coaches to understand and prioritize speed and power. Too many football coaches see the game through the lens of hard work and high effort, not the lens of maximum velocity and high outputs. Track coaches need help too. The average track coach comes from a distance background or subscribes to a run-them-to-death, 10×200 program. Originally, the college S&C world was not even on our radar.

Now it is.

This article has been in my head throughout the fall season. While writing this, on the day after the NCAA National Championship Game, I tweeted: “It really seems like last night was a tipping point.” And it truly feels like something happened, where things will never be the same again. It’s like Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Huh? Tipping point? Crossing the Rubicon?

People in our Feed the Cats and TFC-world have been acutely aware of those rebel talents of the strength and conditioning field who are making a break from the meathead approach to football. We watched with excitement as, in their prior positions at Indiana, David Ballou and Dr. Matt Rhea helped make the Hoosiers relevant as a football program.

Matt Rhea was quoted in a Stack article, How a Unique Speed Training Program Flipped the Fortunes of Indiana Football, saying what makes him revolutionary: “The old adage you can’t teach speed or you can’t develop speed in guys at this level is just highly inaccurate.” Also from the same Stack article: Rhea, along with IU Director of Football Performance Dave Ballou, arrived in Bloomington in January of 2018. Over the course of the next year, Indiana players saw their top running speed increase by an average of over 3 miles per hour.

For those of you new to the miles per hour game, DK Metcalf ran 1.37 mph faster than Budda Baker in the famous rundown back in October 2020.

College teams recruit fast athletes. I can’t imagine what an average speed increase of over 3 miles per hour would look like.

When Rhea and Ballou went to Alabama, I told people that Alabama may never lose another game. Especially given the Neanderthal state of affairs in many S&C programs.

When @MattRheaPhD and @UA_CoachBallou went to Alabama, I told people that Alabama may never lose another game, says @pntrack. Share on X

You see, Alabama has always recruited the best athletes in the country. Unlike the NFL, where the worst teams are awarded the top draft picks, the best college programs get multiple first round picks every year. There’s nothing fair about recruiting. The rich get richer. Filthy rich. Bad teams are screwed. Alabama has always been rich in talent.

But what happens when you train those future NFL players the right way? What happens when you stop doing s**t that makes players slow? What happens when speed becomes the priority and the weight room becomes a part of the plan, not the plan?

“When you stop viewing the weight room as a place to break athletes down and start viewing it as a place to build them, your perspective on stress shifts from excess to optimal.” ~ Matt Rhea

The prioritization of speed can be seen in this tweet by Dr.Matt Rhea from last May:

The greatest sprint coach in the country, Boo Schexnayder, recognized the significance of Matt Rhea.

Alabama Recruits Multi-Sport Athletes

Matt Rhea’s work is brilliant and will forever change football in America. However, don’t underestimate the talent he gets to work with.

Tyler Leising at Tracking Football provided me with some of Tracking Football’s data showing the multi-sport connection to Alabama recruiting:

• 73% of Alabama’s roster were multi-sport athletes in high school and 64% ran high school track.
• This year’s Heisman Trophy winner, DeVonta Smith, was a track athlete and played high school basketball. 10.67 in the 100m. Also solid in the 400: 49.34. Smith is projected as a top ten pick in the NFL Draft.
• The other projected top ten pick in the draft is Patrick Surtain II, who ran 10.87 in the 100m at American Heritage H.S. in Fort Lauderdale.
• Jaylen Waddle missed most of the season with an ankle injury, but still projects as a first round pick. Waddle ran 10.84 in the 100m, and like many wide receivers, excelled as a long jumper (22’9”). Waddle also played basketball.
• Quarterback Mac Jones will also likely get picked in the first round. Jones was not a multi-sport athlete in high school.
• The fifth potential first-round pick coming out of Alabama this year will be 6’4” 310 pound DE Christian Barmore. Barmore was not a multi-sport athlete in high school.
• At 226 pounds, Najee Harris played basketball and ran track in high school. 11.19 in the 100m.
• Wide receiver John Metchie III played lacrosse at a high school in New Jersey.
• Wide receiver Slade Bolden played baseball in high school.
• 6’6” 320 pound offensive tackle Alex Leatherwood threw the shot put 49’3” in high school.
• Center Chris Owens threw the shot 46’10” in high school.
• 6’3” 327 pound Emil Ekiyor Jr. played basketball in high school.
• 6’5” 242 pound tight end Miller Forristall ran a 52.53 400m in high school.
• 6’4” 222 pound linebacker Christian Harris ran 11.53 in the 100m.
• Starting CB Josh Jobe ran 10.90 in the 100m, 21.56 in the 200m, and ran on a super-fast 4×1: 40.97.
• Safety Daniel Wright ran the 400m in 48.60, high jumped 6’4”, and long jumped 22’6”.
• Safety Jordan Battle played basketball and ran the 200 in 22.21.

Alabama’s Pipeline to the NFL

Since 2010, Alabama has sent 143 players to the NFL. That’s an average of 14.3 per year, meaning that on any given Alabama roster, there’s probably 57 future NFL players.

60% ran high school track. (The #1 best sport for building athleticism!)

50% played high school basketball. (The second-best sport for building athleticism!)

19 ran under 10.99 in the 100m.

18 long jumped over 20 feet.

10 threw the shot over 50 feet.

The Future of Speed-Based Football

Alabama will continue to recruit the best athletes in the country. Those participating in track and field will have verified athleticism and will have special value.

But, everyone recruits the best athletes. Everyone recruits track athletes. Ohio State’s roster featured an incredible 78% multi-sport athletes. 57% of their roster ran track in high school.

LSU’s Ed Orgeron went on the recruiting trail looking for track athletes as soon as they won last year’s national title. He had lots of work to do after FOURTEEN of LSU’s players were drafted by the NFL.

With everyone beating the bushes to find the fastest high school football players, the difference will become the training of those athletes at the college level. Will multi-million dollar football programs continue to turn their athletes over to bodybuilders, powerlifters, and cheerleaders?

With everyone beating the bushes to find the fastest high school football players, the difference will become *the training of those athletes at the college level,* says @pntrack. Share on X

Will NCAA college football teams continue to recruit speed…then neglect it?

Will the S&C world continue to celebrate the number of players benching 405, cleaning 300, and then publish embarrassing videos of the world’s best athletes going through speed ladders?

Or will we find people who can make those athletes faster and more powerful?

The Rubicon has been crossed.

The rest of college football will adapt or get left in the dust.

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

A couple years ago, I had the opportunity to share how to train for acceleration and closing speed in distance running and our success at Downers Grove South High School. The implementation of running mechanics, fly sprints, and running-specific strength training in addition to our training cycle led to drastic end-of-season improvements at the state meet for each of our runners racing for 3 miles. Over the past two years, we have continued to implement speed training in our training plan, leading to a fifth-place finish at state in 2019 and top 10 ranking for much of the 2020 season.

Unfortunately, over this past summer, with restrictions related to COVID-19 and uncertainty about the status of the upcoming season, our team was not able to meet for in-person camp. Therefore, I sought out athletes seeking training. I had the opportunity to train a couple of distance runners: Morgan was a high school runner, and Annie had just finished her freshman year in college.

Background

When both athletes came to me in May, they had not run a competitive race in more than two months. Morgan had continued to do 4- to 5-mile runs throughout the spring, with the hopes of running an outdoor race (which never occurred). Before she was to take a two-week break, I told her to run a 2-mile time trial around the streets by her house just to see what she could run. She ran 13:02, which put her on target to run her personal best from cross country in the fall, which was 19:33. By contrast, Annie came to me with shin splints in both legs, which had been bothering her for over a couple months. She stated her shin splints were the result of too much volume and not being able to run on softer surfaces as she had during cross country.

As we began training, I decided to use the aerobic speed reserve algorithm to determine the number of fly repeats each athlete should complete during the session. I timed each athlete running a 20-meter fly and 300-meter run. The algorithm provides you with a time range depending on the distance of the fly for a given workout. For max-velocity workouts, I kept both athletes between 10 and 30 meters. The goal for each workout was for the athlete to run each repetition within the given range. Once the athlete missed the time range twice, the workout ended.

Overview of Summer Training

For the first three weeks, I had each athlete primarily focus on running mechanics through the use of mini hurdles and 20-meter flys based on the 1999 research by Lassi Paavolainen, which suggested that improving 20-meter times led to improving 5k times. I started to implement lactate workouts once per week, in addition to one max-velocity day after the first three weeks. Here were the primary speed workouts for the summer:

1. 20-meter flys (15-20 fly-in; rest: 2-3 minutes)
2. 5 x 100 meter with 10-meter fly-in (rest: walk back)
3. 800-meter predictor, 2 sets x 3 x 150 meters (rest: 3-4 minutes between reps, 8 minutes between sets, add 10 seconds to total time)
4. 800-meter predictor, 2 x 3 x 200 meters (rest 3-4 minutes between reps, 8 minutes between sets; add each time, multiply by.667 + 4 seconds for each set)

Note: The 800-meter predictors are to predict event performance; they’re not a formula for workout prescription. For predictor workouts, the goal is to run each interval fast but maintain consistency with times, much like the event itself. One of the reasons I used 800 predictors was because Morgan wanted to break 2:30 in the 800. The predictor workout allowed me to see what she would run without running the actual distance.

Throughout the summer, I had each athlete complete each of these workouts at least once. We started with 5 x 100, since it was the least volume of the three workouts. The purpose of this workout was to give me an idea of what they could run for a 400 without sprinting a lap around the track.

Through trial and error, I found repeat 150s to be the most effective for each athlete. Morgan made little progress in any of the lactate workouts but was able to improve her 20-meter fly time. On the other hand, Annie improved slightly with the repeat 150s and improved her 20-meter fly time by .16 in six weeks.

I continued to stress that, even though the progress was small, the consistency of addressing speed would lead to much more noticeable gains in longer distances, says @Coach Farthing. Share on X

As far as analyzing why each athlete responded minimally to the lactate workouts, I had to remind them and myself these were often the second training session of their day. I continued to stress that, even though the progress was small, the consistency of addressing speed would lead to much more noticeable gains in longer distances. Each athlete shared their coach’s summer training plan, and I determined to have them complete a max-velocity or lactate workout based on feedback from the athlete and times from workouts. Morgan’s training plan consisted of more tempo runs, hill workouts, and long runs on Friday. Annie’s summer training plan consisted mostly of 5- to 6-mile runs rotating between easy, progression, and tempo runs.

Results

In terms of determining the training effect of speed training, both athletes completed 2-mile time trials over the summer. Here are the improvements Morgan made over the summer and from last season to this season:

*Season was cancelled. Athlete ran 2-mile time trial prior to a break before starting summer training.

*Indoor 800-meter split from 3/9/20.

Annie’s coach also had athletes complete 2-mile time trials on the track at the beginning and end of summer training to demonstrate the payoff of running over the summer and used the times for workouts. Here are her times:





*High school personal best

Athlete Perspective

After summer training, I asked each athlete some questions about the effectiveness of their speed training:

Q: Of all the different drills and training you did, what do you feel helped you the most?

Morgan: Out of the variety of drills you had me do during our speed sessions, I found that the lactate workouts helped me most. More specifically, the 150-meter lactate workouts. These workouts were the hardest that I encountered while training with you. As a distance runner, I felt that they were very beneficial. I loved the change of pace from normal mileage and the idea of being able to predict what I could run in certain races.

The mental gains were just as much as the physical gains. I was able to use some of the endurance I already had while also working on my speed. The predictions and physical work from these workouts helped me break 2:30 in the 800-meter dash, a milestone I had been trying to reach for a year.

Annie: Out of all the drills I did, I believe running through the mini hurdles was the most beneficial for me. The hurdles helped me improve my form, cadence, speed, coordination, and knee drive, and eventually helped decrease the pain in my shins.

The hurdles were hard at first, because it felt unnatural to run fast while also having to run over “obstacles.” While the hurdles helped more with the fundamentals of running, the 20-meter sprints definitely helped me with my speed at all different distances. Since I am a distance runner, I do not usually work on speed at that short of a distance, but by the end of the summer I was able to carry a fast speed from 20 meters all the way up to 200 meters.

Q: How do you feel speed training helped your distance running mentally and/or physically?

Morgan: I found many positive effects from speed training that helped both my physical and mental states of mind. The physical aspects I noticed right away. I was able to easily kick into another gear while running a faster run, like a tempo. The change of pace felt smoother than it had in previous years. I also found my form becoming more consistent and not changing as much when I would get tired during long runs. The consistency of my form helped my legs feel looser throughout the week, allowing me to train harder and complete more mileage. My legs felt more stable beneath me as well, also allowing me to run more mileage and “pound the ground” with less aches and pains.

There were also a good number of mental aspects that I noticed throughout the weeks. The most prevalent mental gain was being able to see the change from week to week, watching the times get faster. The gaining of speed gave me an amazing confidence boost to run certain times I hadn’t been able to in the past.

Annie: The speed training most obviously helped improve my 2-mile time trial. At the beginning of the summer, only two-ish weeks into training, I ran over 14 minutes for 2 miles. By the end of the summer, I was at 13 minutes, which was over 30 seconds faster per mile. Not only did I feel better physically, by the end of the summer I mentally felt more confident going into my cross country season, since I had seen so much improvement throughout the summer.

During training I did various types of speed workouts, so I constantly saw improvement, and it helped prevent training from getting monotonous. I would run anywhere from 10-meter sprints to 200-meter sprints, with some days focusing on shorter sprints and other days focusing on longer sprints. Then, when I would go back to certain workouts, I could compare it to earlier dates and would usually see improvement. My improvements at shorter distances also helped improve the pace I was running my easy runs, tempos, and long runs, and I averaged about a minute faster per mile than I had during previous summers.

Faster and More Durable

Based on the data, it is evident the inclusion of speed training has a positive effect on running performance. Each athlete had a different training plan for summer, but the addition of speed training led to tremendous improvement in all distance measurements. Additionally, each athlete discussed how speed training and specific running drills and exercises actually led to the elimination of shin splints and allowed them to be more durable throughout the summer and season without injuries.

Each athlete had a different training plan for summer, but the addition of speed training led to tremendous improvement in all distance measurements, says @CoachFarthing. Share on X

Although both of the athletes I trained completed speed training sessions in addition to their prescribed summer plan by their coach, it is incredibly simple to implement speed training into any training plan. I know coaches who simply have runners do mostly easy mileage over the summer, while others incorporate a variety of runs such as hills, progression, tempo, or VO2.

I recommend you address speed training twice per week during the general preparation phase of a cross country training plan. Many coaches emphasize “building a base” by focusing on volume through easy runs. However, you can improve endurance with the use of speed training through the lactate workouts or by stacking numerous full effort fly attempts. Runners will not only improve their performance, but also their durability for handling the volume often prescribed by coaches.

In terms of speed training implementation during a season, here is my suggestion: You can afford to have one day during a 9- or 12-day microcycle dedicated to max effort 150s or 200s. After the workout, do NOT have athletes complete a traditional cooldown by jogging more. It will undo the high-intensity training they just completed. For a cooldown, I would suggest exercises like lunges, plyometrics, and ankle rocker drills. I should note that if you notice athletes struggling with 150s or 200s, try a shorter distance like 100 or 120 meters, especially for your younger athletes.

Max-velocity training could be a perfect tool for recovery days. In Coach O’Malley’s article “Training Zones, Mileage, and Mentality,” he discussed how his team sometimes completes 10-second sprints up a hill on easy days. Ten seconds is entirely too long for speed work. Stick with 20-meter sprints, as I’ve mentioned. They are the perfect distance for maximum effort without a breakdown of mechanics. If you do address speed on a recovery day, be mindful of volume and focus on a handful of quality reps instead of worrying about volume. In fact, you can use a timing system or stopwatch to time athletes, which would promote high performance.

Stick with 20-meter sprints. They are the perfect distance for maximum effort without a breakdown of mechanics, says @Coach Farthing. Share on X

My hope from this article is that distance coaches will reflect upon their own training practices. If we all have our runners complete similar training plans, why are some programs more successful than others? Speed training will have a profound effect on runners regardless of experience and could be the difference-maker for your program.

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

So, you’re interested in software that can support your strength and conditioning department, and CoachMePlus has supported coaches at all levels for more than 10 years. It should be a good fit, right? Not necessarily.

CoachMePlus designed its software for coaches chasing marginal gains. Developing competitive advantages in the weight room comes down to automating routine tasks and tracking your key performance indicators (KPIs). Automation allows you to have more face time with your athletes, and tracking KPIs ensures that your training has the intended effects. We can’t recommend strength programming or tell you what KPIs to track, because we believe that is up to you and the community.

CoachMePlus won’t necessarily reduce the number of hours that you work, but it can improve the quality of those hours. Share on X

CoachMePlus gives the coach total control over their program, not just typing in sets and reps like other programs. We won’t necessarily reduce the number of hours that you work, but we can improve the quality of those hours. CoachMePlus organizes and presents information about your department in real time. This real-time information allows you to quickly focus on what matters, not simply collect workout cards or survey responses.

Strength and Conditioning Software

When you’re looking to write workouts and share them with your athletes, what you want is something that works for both Android and Apple (which covers most phones). Then, you need a program builder that lines up with your current strength and conditioning plan. The best way to check that out is to look at your programming for these two things: workloads and training structure.

Here are your options in CoachMePlus for Workloads:

• Pounds or kilograms
• Time or duration
• Distance in meters
• RPE
• % 1RMs
• % body weight
• We also have an option for notes, which coaches use for velocity-based training metrics.

If these workload metrics match your programming, then take a look at how you’ve structed your program:

• How are your exercises sequenced: sets and reps, circuits, progressions, ladders, etc.?
• Do you use work-to-rest intervals?
• Is your programming based on metric or imperial units?

CoachMePlus can handle sets and reps, circuits, and progressions easily. Ladders are a pain to program, but it can be done. However, the app can’t handle work-to-rest intervals. Imperial and metric measurements can be implemented quickly.

So how does it work? Our Program Builder consists of three sections: exercises, circuits, and programs. We have a large exercise library that you can draw from, or you can add your own exercise. You can upload your own videos or link out to videos directly.

Next, combine those exercises into circuits. Circuits are sequences of exercises that you can save and reuse within program days. Circuits have the option to add supersets and progressions for coaches who have those training structures. Finally, the Program Builder allows you to organize your circuits over the span of an entire program. You can use these programs again and again.

You might’ve used Teambuildr or TrainHeroic before, or possibly BridgeAthletic. All of us have similar training software. Teambuildr seems to have more options, but most of those are just labeled Notes such as VBT, body weight, etc. They have APRE with their software, which is very useful for coaches who aren’t interested in adding VBT. TrainHeroic has a great athlete experience but provides fewer options on the programming side. They also make it extremely easy to add athletes to your programming with shareable group codes. BridgeAthletic has the coolest-looking software of any of us, but it is expensive and only does workout sharing.

How to Implement

The strength and conditioning software comes with every CoachMePlus package.

Testing, Monitoring, and Reporting

Now that you’ve got workouts down, you’re likely looking to do more. At this point you’ll want to determine what metrics (KPIs) you plan on tracking, then see if the features below match those options. For example, say you want to track flying 10s with your athletes. We have the ability to add a test to our system called “Flying 10,” visualize it for each athlete, create a leaderboard, or compare flying 10 speeds over time.

Testing

Most coaches will have a few tests they want to measure with each athlete group. In our system, we call those measurement “fields.” They include common measures such as speed, strength, and mobility tests, and we can easily add them to any package.

If you want to add in a calculated test, then you’re technically using the Algorithm Engine. The Algorithm Engine allows coaches to run calculations on any measurement field in our system. For example, if you want to measure relative strength, you would use the Algorithm Engine to calculate strength divided by body weight.

What makes it an algorithm is that you can run calculated tests on device API data. In practice, let’s say that a coach was measuring an athlete’s dynamic strength index using Force Decks. The Force Decks API would pull the testing data directly into CoachMePlus. That data would then be combined with 1RM (example), and the algorithm would calculate the new dynamic strength test in real time.

Monitoring

The simplest monitoring tool that we have is our research-backed Wellness Questionnaire that is automatically assigned to each athlete. The Questionnaire provides coaches with a quick snapshot of training responses among their athletes. Our body charts allow you to track pain and soreness as well. Questionnaire data, once collected, can be visualized quickly using Dashboards or Assessments.

Dashboards and Assessments takes the data you want to look at—training, testing, device, or questionnaire—and allows you to peruse the information in real time. Dashboards typically are bar or line charts, but we provide multiple options including radar graphs, dials, and trendlines. Assessments are color-coded tables that provide quick insights on how your team is doing. You can set up alerts for Assessment values that are outside of a specific range: e.g., someone scored really low on the questionnaire. Alerts will buzz your phone and let you know that something’s not right.

You can set up alerts for Assessment values that are outside of a specific range, and they will buzz your phone to let you know when something’s not right. Share on X

Usually, Dashboards are where coaches like to use their device data. If you create a Dashboard or Assessment in CoachMePlus, it will pull your device data into the visualization without any work on your part. Once you log in to your athlete’s profile, all their information will be right there.

Reports

Dashboards and Assessments can sometimes be limited because they are designed to show recent data. If you want to see how an athlete or team has progressed over time, run a Report. A Report allows you to pull a measurement value for a desired time range. You can go back months or years to show how an athlete has improved since they worked with you.

How to Implement

All packages include basic tests. The Performance Package allows you to add custom tests. Both the Pro and Elite Packages support calculated tests (Algorithm Engine) but differ depending on the complexity.

Integrated Devices

We offer two types of device integrations: CSV import and API. Both integrations pull your data directly into CoachMePlus and match it to each athlete in the system. CSV integrations involve exporting the data from your hardware device and importing it into our system using the Universal Data Importer. This does require some manual work, but it is highly cost effective for smaller programs. It’s useful for inputting periodic data such as testing. An API integration is a “set it and forget it” integration. Once it’s hooked up, it will pull your information directly into CoachMePlus automatically. Both integrations allow our Visualization Suite to immediately display your information.

Free Integrations

Apple HealthKit API integrations: Apple HealthKit is like the App Store but for health and fitness. Any device that’s compatible with Apple HealthKit will automatically send its data directly to CoachMePlus. Right now, we visualize resting heart rate, but we will add more data as we continue to develop.

Mindbody or EZFacility: Member management is difficult, so for private facilities we offer an API integration to either Mindbody or EZFacility. The integration pulls over all the members from either of these software programs and creates them as athletes in CoachMePlus.

SimpliFaster Integrations

We have committed to creating integrations with SimpliFaster products. Integrations with these supported devices are included in the SimpliFaster Comprehensive Team System. We currently offer four integrations and are actively working on adding another timing gate to our integrations list:

1. VBT SF (CSV)
2. GymAware (API)
3. Swift Performance (API)
4. Dashr Timing Gates (API)

Additional Supported Integrations

We currently support integrations for the following devices. The cost of every integration on this list varies because the data is different. Our customers actively use every device here. Check below to see if we support your device.

Athlete Tracking

• Catapult

Polar

Kinexon

STATSports

Monitoring

• Firstbeat

WHOOP

Omegawave

Assessment

• Fit3D

AccuPower

Motus

Nordbord

ForceDecks

ForceFrame

SportVU

VBT

EliteForm

How to Implement

Supporting every device integration is like supporting a foreign language version of your strength and conditioning program: The meaning of the words might be the same, but it could end up lost in translation. You might wonder why it’s so expensive, and that’s because we have to stay up to date with every change that device companies make to keep the connection stable. That’s not unique to us—any company that you deal with has to manage those integrations. Really think about what devices you need to integrate with before you make a decision to move forward.

If you’re wondering what package you should get, every package includes the free integrations. SimpliFaster device connections are available with the SimpliFaster bundles. If you want an integration from the list of additional supported integrations, you would need the Elite Package.

 

Team Access Points

One of the major concerns that coaches have with strength and conditioning software is that athletes will be on their phones in the weight room. Phones can be distracting, especially for younger athletes. That’s why we’ve made all of our phone app features available for tablets. Your athletes can answer questionnaires and complete training on any iPad with a quick tap. So, what does this look like in a weight room setting?

Rack View

Allow your athletes to complete their training on an iPad. The system can handle up to four athletes at a time, and each can go at their own pace. It has a quick and simple workflow for training groups.

Weight Tracking/Hydration

This is a favorite with football and hockey programs. Our Bluetooth scale hooks up directly with our weight tracking. You can have athletes click their face on the screen and step on the scale, and it will automatically log in their weight. No errors for manual entry. If you want, you can use the weigh-in/weigh-out feature to provide personalized hydration recommendations to your athletes.

For Coaches Who Want More Than Sets and Reps

There are great options out there for pushing out workouts, but if you want to do more than just be a barbell babysitter, have a look at CoachMePlus. Our platform improves the relationships between coaches and athletes by allowing them to work collaboratively toward their performance goals. Good strength and conditioning software should allow coaches to have more meaningful conversations with each athlete by providing two key benefits: automating routine tasks and allowing coaches to set their own key performance indicators.

There are great options out there for pushing workouts, but if you want to do more than just be a barbell babysitter, have a look at CoachMePlus. Share on X

Automating routine tasks like workout distribution, survey collection, and data analysis allows coaches to spend more face time with their athletes. And because coaches are able to set their own KPIs, they’re able to have more meaningful conversations with every athlete.

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

One of the things I enjoy most with respect to sprint performance is looking at training programs, seeing what has taken place behind the scenes, and trying to piece together some of the clues that may have led to an athlete’s performance. As I alluded to in my last article, I believe there are many different paths to sprint success. Some sprinters appear to thrive off approaches based around high volumes of work and some appear to do better with lower volumes at higher intensities. Some sprinters have a fairly extensive strength training regimen, while others do not appear to lift much, if at all.

There seems to be a huge variation between athletes in terms of the training they do, yet they sometimes arrive at very similar results. This could be termed “inter athlete training variation,” but I have recently been thinking more about intra athlete training variation. That is, some of the changes an athlete makes in their own training throughout their career.

As someone who had my first competitive track and field season in 1998, I have had a fairly long “career.” (I don’t really like calling it that, because my mediocre performances don’t deserve such a label.) Due to exposure to many ideas, I have been able to try different approaches to training and make changes over the course of the last 22 years. In this article, I will outline some of my observations about my own path as an athlete and some considerations to help minimize the performance decrease as an aging sprinter.

Training Volume

Training volume is simply the amount of training you do. In track terms, it is typically written as the total number of meters completed in a training session, but in the weight room it could be expressed as the total number of kilograms or pounds lifted, depending on whether you are American or not!

At 17 years old, I joined the Milton Keynes Athletics Club (now Marshall Milton Keynes Athletics Club) and was coached by Mike Leonard, who had a lot of success with junior athletes around that period, most notably with Craig Pickering. Unfortunately, I did not keep training diaries at this point, but upon reflection (which can sometimes trick us without accurate records), I believe we did quite a large volume of general work. An example of a fairly general workout we often did in the winter was “winders,” as Mike called them, which was running the straights and jogging the bends. We would build up to two sets of five laps, which was 2,000 meters of what is essentially tempo running, and you could add to that an equivalent volume of jogging.

My view is that larger volumes of lower-intensity work may well have a place in the program of younger athletes, and the success of the training group at the time perhaps reflected this. This work allows for the development of more general qualities. It subjects the tissues to many contacts, thereby potentially making them more resilient, and the athlete learns how to function under varying degrees of fatigue. Anaerobic glycolysis and the aerobic energy system are developed, and these factors could allow the athlete to develop their capacity to train and recover from both efforts within a session and between sessions.

Charlie Francis, in his book Key Concepts Elite, states “training starts with general fitness and moves towards power over time. In other words, you can gain whole seconds in the 200 (and by extension a large reduction in the deceleration section of the 100) while initially you can gain only tenths in the first 30m.”

As a masters athlete, I am now exceedingly cautious in regard to how much volume I encounter in each session, says @davidmaris958. Share on X

However, as a masters athlete, I am now exceedingly cautious in regard to how much volume I encounter in each session. I have had a recent history of Achilles issues, which is not too unusual amongst my population, and one of the things I have noticed that causes it to flare up is excessive volume. I tend to look at around 1,000 meters being the upper limit of what I have been able to safely tolerate in recent years with respect to my Achilles, which is plenty if I want to develop acceleration, speed, and to a large extent, speed endurance.

A typical acceleration session would consist of likely no more than 10 repetitions of 40-meter runs, equal to 400 meters, and even then, that may be a liberal estimate of appropriate acceleration volume. A typical speed development session may consist of no more than six efforts over 60 meters, equal to 360 meters, if the runs are being carried out with maximal intent, though that may not be necessary in every speed development session, as I will touch on later. I find that speed endurance sessions can be a little more varied, but typically they would not consist of much more than 600 meters or so.

As previously mentioned, I believe there are different paths for each athlete to develop optimally, and I believe I respond quite well to some degree of tempo. Therefore, this is where I have to ensure I exercise caution, and something like five runs over 200 meters—or 300, 250, 200, 150, 100 meters, or whatever other combination of runs you could imagine, totaling 1,000 meters—would likely be the limit of what I feel confident doing at the moment.

It may also be worth experimenting with different surfaces with regard to volume. Grass or turf are softer and may be easier on the tissues. I have found that hills tend to feel easier on my body, perhaps because the gradient means the foot has a shorter distance to travel vertically before striking the ground, therefore causing a reduction in the velocity at which the ground contact occurs. It may be as simple as it places a ceiling on the potential intensity, therefore allowing for a greater volume of work to be safely completed (more on the relationship between volume and intensity later).

An additional point worth making with regard to volume is that even if a given training volume is set for the day, the older I get, the more I try to get comfortable with walking away during a workout if something does not feel right. This, I have found, is quite a difficult skill to master, as there is a fine line between sensible in terms of mitigating injury risk and being overcautious (or potentially lazy), which leads to an athlete unnecessarily not completing enough work to get the desired stimulus on a regular basis.

Training Intensity

As volume is the amount of training done, intensity refers to the effort by which a training session is completed. Intensity is usually represented as a percentage of maximum output. On the track, you may calculate the average velocity obtained in a personal best performance for a given distance. Then you could work out the average velocity of a given rep and therefore what the intensity would be with respect to that personal best performance. In the weight room, intensity is generally expressed as a percentage of a 1 rep max for a given lift.

Throughout my first few years of training and into my early 20s, my perception is that the proportion of high-intensity sprinting in my training increased. As my training history increased, so did my tolerance to work, and as I was subjected to greater overall stimuli, I saw consistent improvements in my sprint performance. In my 30s, I have become more aware of the intensities I hit in training.

For years, my actions suggested that I was of the belief that sprinting was sprinting and therefore any speed development work was done maximally, or there was no point. I was very much in line with what has recently become the “Feed the Cats” movement. If your goal is to run as fast as possible, then it is fairly obvious that in training, at some point, you will also need to run as fast as possible. However, that perhaps does not necessarily mean it is the only thing an athlete should do.

More recently, I have started to consider the nuance in this concept, and as I alluded to in my last article, there may be benefits to carrying out speed development work at submaximal intensities. Doing so may help allow for better mechanics to be rehearsed along with rhythm and “smoothness.” Due to potentially more optimal mechanics, submaximal sprinting can therefore be a safer option, which is well worth considering for an athlete with a lot of entries in their injury history. And older athletes are likely to have experienced more injuries than younger athletes, as age is a known risk factor with regard to hamstring injuries, according to Craig Pickering’s article “Training the Masters Sprinter,” and they have been involved in the sport for longer.

Additionally, as I mentioned in the previous section, there is typically an inverse relationship between volume and intensity. That is, the harder you work, the less work you can complete. Therefore, operating at lower intensities can permit a greater volume of work to be completed (though in my case, not above 1,000 meters). This allows for the completion of more contacts, and therefore more opportunities to rehearse and practice sound mechanics, which ultimately increases the likelihood of technical competency becoming second nature. As mentioned, I think there is a place for maximal intensity runs in a sprinter’s training program, but I think it is worth asking the question, “How often do they need to be implemented?”

Håkan Andersson recently tweeted, “You have to dare to think 98% even when racing,” which I interpreted as alluding to the concept that the superior coordination and relaxation of submax efforts outweighed the extra couple of percent effort in terms of the resultant absolute output. This anecdote highlights the potential issue that intensity and perceived exertion are not necessarily synonymous. I do not claim to have all, or any, of the answers as relates to this, as these are ideas I am still juggling around in my head.

I have been leaning toward the idea that staying closer to 95% intensity is more appropriate for me to optimize performance and maintain health, says @davidmaris958. Share on X

The Charlie Francis literature put forward the notion that in order to develop speed, work needed to be completed at intensities of 95% or above. Recently, I have been leaning toward the idea that staying closer to 95% is more appropriate for me to optimize performance and maintain health. Deciding at which intensity to complete a workout can be a dynamic process. If an athlete initially plans to complete their runs at a very high intensity but has had a poor night’s sleep or a particularly stressful day at work beforehand, then there is no reason that the intensity of the workout cannot be downregulated. The reverse is also true, though I would recommend exercising caution in terms of how frequently very high intensity sprints are attempted, particularly with an older athlete.

Regulating training intensity is an example of a scenario where an accurate timing device, such as a Freelap, may be useful as a monitoring tool, to provide greater feedback that will better enable the performance of runs in the desired intensity range.

Training Density

We have covered the definitions of volume and intensity, and training density is very simply the volume of training completed within a given time frame. As volume and intensity have an inverse relationship, so do density and intensity. The less dense a session, the more intense it can be. Consider completing three runs of 200 meters with two minutes of recovery, or three 200 meter runs with 15 minutes of recovery. As mentioned above, I have become more cautious regarding the intensities I expose myself to, and manipulating the recovery times between runs, and therefore the density, is a tool we can use to help enforce the completion of efforts in the desired intensity range.

Manipulating the recovery times between runs, and therefore the density, is a tool we can use to help enforce the completion of efforts in the desired intensity range, says @davidmaris958. Share on X

I tend to view density in two ways: the density of an individual session (as would be the case in the above example) and the density as it relates to the frequency of sessions within a given time frame (weeks, months, years).

As a teenager, while at high school, I typically trained three, or sometimes four, days per week, as was the standard in the British club system. As a side note, while beyond the scope of this article, this is a topic I find very interesting given the historical junior success of British sprinters on the international stage when compared to senior success. Over the past 30 years, British males have had a great deal of international junior success over 100 meters, and I would like to learn more about the changes made in the training of successful British junior sprinters as they transition to the senior ranks. In particular, I would like to learn more about the variable of density.

I began university late, at 20 years old, and what was then the University of Wales Institute in Cardiff (now Cardiff Metropolitan University) had excellent facilities, including an indoor 200-meter track with a weight room equipped with platforms and bumper plates right next to it. (This highlighted the professional attitude they applied to their athletic program.) This meant my training density increased to typically six days per week, with each of those consisting of either a track or weight room workout, or sometimes a combination of the two. My academic timetable allowed me to devote that much time to training without (many) repercussions, and as stated, my sprint performance improved.

After I completed my undergraduate degree, I began a Postgraduate Certificate in Education to qualify me to teach, which was a fairly intense year that involved full-time work placements, time in the classroom, and the submission of assignments. Throughout this period, I reduced my training density to typically between four and five workouts per week, usually three track sessions and one or two sessions in the weight room. As my professional commitments increased and I gained other responsibilities, it became more practical to diminish my training density to a maximum of four workouts per week, and I think this raises a really important point for masters athletes.

The vast, vast majority of masters athletes (notable exceptions include Asafa Powell, Justin Gatlin, Kim Collins, Mike Rodgers, and Churandy Martina) must work in addition to their training, and in many cases they may have advanced far enough up the career ladder to be in a role that lands them a good deal of responsibility, with the accompanying stress. Many masters athletes also have spouses and children (hopefully as supportive as mine). All these factors come together to create balance in an athlete’s life, but there is no denying that in order to have a successful career or a successful family life, time needs to be invested.

I see that time being taken away from training (to an extent) can be of benefit to an older athlete, in that it can help to enforce more complete recovery between sessions. I have read, on more than one occasion, about the idea that masters athletes often try to train as they did in their teens or 20s and get injured as a result. The responsibilities life throws at us can help prevent older athletes from falling into this trap, and if an athlete becomes overzealous in a training session, these responsibilities can help ensure a greater degree of recovery prior to the next workout.

I see that time being taken away from training (to an extent) can be of benefit to an older athlete, in that it can help to enforce more complete recovery between sessions, says @davidmaris958. Share on X

It is worth once again referring readers to Craig’s masters sprinter article with respect to recovery, as he alluded to the concept that increased recovery times in older athletes could be largely based upon perception. I consider the placebo effect to be a powerful one, and therefore simply feeling like you are better recovered, even if there is no additional physiological benefit, by waiting longer before the next training session could bring about more positive outcomes.

Additionally, it is worth considering that, as mentioned, masters athletes may encounter greater responsibilities, and therefore stresses, in other aspects of their life that may contribute to prolonging the recovery process. So, while age itself may not mean longer recovery times are required, other issues commonly associated with that era in an athlete’s life potentially may.

Weight Training

Before I began university, weight training was not really a part of my training regimen. I sporadically “went to the gym,” but in hindsight, I did not know what I was doing when I was there. Upon my move to Cardiff, weights comprised a significant part of my training program, and I typically lifted 2-3 times per week. I was introduced to the Olympic lifts, notably power cleans, as well as deadlifts and Romanian deadlifts, all of which I performed regularly, and I saw rapid developments in my strength.

More recently, I have begun to consider the role weight training plays in a sprinter’s development more carefully, and I currently feel that the negatives outweigh the positives in my own training. Gary Finegan, a good friend of mine who has been coached by Tom Tellez since 2006, eliminated weight training a couple of years ago, and he suggested to me that I try the same approach. Initially, I was resistant, likely due to the fact that British sprint culture in the mid-2000s had lifting, and power cleans in particular, as a central training component, which caused me to have a kind of emotional attachment to the weight room.

I have begun to consider the role weight training plays in a sprinter’s development more carefully, and I currently feel that the negatives outweigh the positives in my own training. Share on X

This year, the pandemic meant a lot of parts of the world were locked down. Massachusetts was no exception, and it was therefore not possible for me to access a weight room facility, which turned out to be my silver lining. Through the months of no lifting, I began to notice how much better my knees and back, in particular, felt, allowing for more consistent track workouts, which is where the training emphasis needs to be as a sprinter, in my opinion. It could be that my lifting form was poor and that led to the discomfort I experienced, but my bias is that I was taught how to lift by excellent coaches, and I believe my form was fairly solid.

My feelings are that, for most developmental sprinters, weight training is beneficial. But after they develop a foundation of strength, I question how much time they can spend in the weight room that will bring about adequate returns on the time investment. My current perspective is that, for myself, weight training falls into the “nice to do” category as opposed to the “need to do” category, and the time investment is better spent elsewhere, notably recovery between my track workouts.

In his article, Craig also points out that studies have found a decline in sprint performance was related to a reduction in type II muscle fiber. It may well be that I am not old enough yet to notice a performance loss related to type II muscle fiber reduction, but at the present, I believe the improved feeling with regard to my joint health outweighs a potential loss in muscle mass with respect to my sprint performance.

Measure the Risks vs. the Rewards

Every athlete is different, and therefore every masters athlete is different, and this will impact the changes they make to their training as they age. I have presented some of the factors I have evaluated in my own training over the years, and it is worth noting I have made many mistakes, but each mistake is a learning opportunity.

I think a common goal amongst masters athletes is to reduce the occurrence of injuries, as it can often feel like they take longer to recover from, says @davidmaris958. Share on X

I think a common goal amongst masters athletes is to reduce the occurrence of injuries, as it can often feel like they take longer to recover from. The fact is that injury history is a strong predictor of future injuries (particularly with respect to hamstring tears), and when they cause more injuries further down the line, it has a snowball effect that becomes extremely frustrating. In my experience as an athlete, there is nothing worse than feeling like injuries constantly disrupt training, as it makes it far more difficult to progress. Therefore, the risk versus reward analysis of any decision about training needs to be taken seriously—it is just a case of learning what those risks and rewards are for you.

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

Individualization is one of the hottest topics in the training world—every parent wants their athlete to have a custom program, every athlete wants a program only they are doing, and every coach wants to build into their programming more individualization than the next coach. The problem, though, is that there are only so many training methods to go around. You have undulating block, linear periodization, triphasic training, and others, but at the root of all of these programs is the same end goal: you want to make an athlete better.

There is always an optimal solution for training an athlete, and the key is to find that solution, says @kingashton1. Share on X

The question isn’t how many roads lead to Rome, it’s what’s the most efficient way to actually get there. There is always an optimal solution for training an athlete, and the key is to find that solution. Oftentimes, when trying to individualize programming to athletes, coaches become too caught up in building a vastly different program for each athlete and lose sight of the fact that they are trying to make that athlete better.

Intake, Assessment, and Individualized Buckets

We mainly work with team sport athletes in my gym. Our solution for providing individualized programs without “over-individualizing” or wasting time creating a new program for every participant is to bucket athletes. Each bucket has a different goal, and is made up of general templates that match that training goal. The templates mean we’ve made most of the program already (and, of course, the templates can have minor alterations based on the athlete).

We first divide each athlete by their age into either our youth program, for athletes ages 8-12 years old, or our adult program, for athletes 13 and up. Then, we break those down further into the following buckets:

• Foundations
• Hypertrophy
• Strength 1
• Strength 2
• Power 1
• Power 2

Each of these programs moves from general to specific with each block. When moving from general to more specific, we look at key factors in sport such as energy systems used, specific joint angles that occur in play, planes of motion, and total volume of work encountered. For example, a progression of the squat could go as follows.

These are the main things that we look for in each bucket, but depending on an athlete’s injury history, position, or specific range of motion deficits, the programs can vary slightly within each bucket.

We use the following assessment process to determine which bucket to place each athlete into:

1. Movement screen. We score our movement screen on a scale of 0-30, and each movement is directly transferrable to our programs. Rather than doing a table range of motion screen, we look at squatting, hinging, pressing, and other capabilities. The score on the movement screen then tells us whether an athlete needs to be in our Foundations bucket or not. Our number one priority is that an athlete moves well—if they can’t move, they can’t play, and they will be in our Foundations block until they prove they have the movement capabilities to move to our next program.
2. Body composition. We determine metrics such as lean body mass, body fat percentage, and overall body weight. Then we compare this to where an athlete’s body composition needs to be to compete at a high level in their respective sport. This part of the assessment determines if an athlete will be in a hypertrophy block or not.
3. Force-velocity profile. Using a Tendo unit, we have athletes perform various loads that allow us to predict an accurate one rep max, as well as their current force-velocity profile. We compare this projected max to specific strength KPIs that we have determined to be important in their respective sports. We can then also look at how their force-velocity profile is laid out and see if they are more of a force-biased athlete or a velocity-biased athlete. This is how we determine whether they will need to be in Strength 1, Strength 2, Power 1, or Power 2.
4. Power screen. For this we look at qualities such as vertical jump, sprint times, and reactive strength index. This gives insight into how well an athlete transfers their weight room performance to on-field performance. It also gives us an idea as to how well an athlete utilizes their stretch-shortening cycle. Once we complete the assessment process, we look at an athlete’s yearly training as well as their assessment results and determine the bucket that would suit them the best.

Foundations

The Foundations bucket is built around basic weight room movements. None of these are specific to sport, and the focus instead is on developing quality movements that we can then build on and start to load in the later stages of training. The only metric determining whether an athlete is put in Foundations or not is their movement screen score. If an athlete scores less than 21, we place them in Foundations; if they score higher, we move on to other parts of the assessment to determine what bucket they will be in.

Foundations is the primary training block for athletes in our youth program. Athletes with a younger training age or older athletes finishing a season may get a Foundations block that acts as a short deload period to prepare them for the blocks to come by patterning quality general movement. We have also programmed Foundations for our older athletes who are coming back from surgery as an accumulation phase before they get into more rigorous training.

Hypertrophy

We often program our Hypertrophy phase for athletes with a lower training age or athletes who are farther away from competition. For example, with a baseball pitcher who is relatively high level but could benefit from some extra mass, December would be an ideal time for them to perform a quick, four-week hypertrophy block.

For placement in the Hypertrophy bucket, we look at two key assessment metrics: first their movement screen score, and second their InBody analysis. The InBody gives us metrics such as body fat, lean body mass, and overall body weight, and determines a segmental lean analysis.

We tend to keep our hypertrophy blocks shorter, as research shows that, past four weeks, athletes usually see more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy than myofibrillar hypertrophy. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is great for bodybuilders because it tends to make you look bigger. When training athletes, however, we look for myofibrillar hypertrophy, as we want to increase muscle density and strength rather than add unnecessary strength and size.

When programming hypertrophy, coaches also need to look at *where* you add the mass, says @kingashton1. Share on X

When programming hypertrophy, coaches also need to look at where you add the mass. For example, front squats have been shown to have more vastus medialis activation than back squats. Given this, it probably would not make a whole lot of sense to assign front squats to someone who wants to sprint faster. Back squats would be a more advantageous choice in this case because additional vastus medialis hypertrophy would create a less-efficient lever when sprinting. These are the types of factors we consider as we progress from the least specific block in foundations to a slightly more specific block in hypertrophy.

Strength 1

Strength 1 is all about creating as much force as possible. Given this, we program all bilateral compound lifts with some unilateral accessory work. For programming in Strength 1 and Strength 2, we look at the two metrics that we looked at in hypertrophy, as well as the force-velocity profile.

Research shows that athletes are able to produce the most force bilaterally; because of this, athletes with large strength deficits will most often be in a Strength 1 block, assuming their movement screen and InBody metrics are sufficient. In Strength 1, we give athletes programs centered on basic strength models such as a 5/3/1 loading scheme. In the later stages of Strength 1, we also introduce athletes to tempos on the eccentric and isometric phases of their compound lifts.

Strength 2

In our Strength 2 bucket, we mainly program unilateral compound exercises, as the joint angles are more specific to those the athletes would encounter in sport. Strength 2 would be an ideal block for an athlete who is already relatively strong and only needs to make slight strength gains. This bucket allows that athlete to train at more specific joint angles, as well as generate the strength adaptations they need.

Additionally, in both Strength 1 and Strength 2, we break athletes further down into position groups. We then divide these into overhead and non-overhead athletes in Strength 1, and overhead, non-overhead, and bigs in Strength 2. The difference between the two groups is slight, but still important. For example, a football quarterback may get some more prehab-type accessory work for their shoulder, while a lineman might get more hypertrophy-based accessory work.

Remember, in this bucket, compounds are unilateral in nature. Overhead and non-overhead athletes would both perform split squats because that joint angle is similar to sport. However, this is not the case for someone in the bigs program; linemen are often in more of a staggered stance than a split stance, and programming staggered stance trap bar deadlifts would reflect this.

We also get slightly more advanced on the loading schemes and periodization models in Strength 2. As with Strength 1, athletes get some specific tempos such as a four-second eccentric or two-second isometric. In a Strength 2 block, athletes are introduced to methods such as an undulating weekly periodization model as well as the French contrast method. The reason for the more advanced training models is that, at this stage in training, athletes start to become better athletes; therefore, more advanced methods are required to create the correct adaptations and continue their progression.

Power 1

The Power 1 bucket focuses on training accelerative strength, strength speed, and power. When training in theses ranges, it is important to see the force-velocity curve as a spectrum rather than individual, clearly defined sections. Every athlete has their own specific makeup of fiber types; given that, peak power will come at a different load and velocity for each of them. Looking at the force-velocity curve as a spectrum, we can then cover different sections and ensure athletes have a robust power base.

Power 1 is broken down into the same position groups as Strength 2, and we also add in a strength-biased versus elastic-biased category. This is where an athlete’s reactive strength index section of the assessment comes into play. To perform at their highest level, athletes must be able to tap into their stretch-shortening cycle. If an athlete is strength-biased, their plyometric work would be more elastic in nature: hurdle hops, continuous broad jumps, and other plyometrics that are similar. For an elastic-biased athlete, their plyometric programming might be seated box jumps, paused box jumps, and other plyometrics that minimize the elastic component. This, again, is a small progression from Strength 1 and Strength 2, and it gets slightly closer to sport. 

Power 2

Power 2 actually has fewer categories than Power 1, since we don’t include a bigs section in Power 2. This bucket focuses on training speed strength and starting strength. (The athletes in our bigs category have no need for those qualities due to the sport they play, so there is no reason to have them in a Power 2 program.)

Our Power 2 program focuses on training speed strength and starting strength. It is as close to sport as you can get without playing the sport or simply sprinting, says @kingashton1. Share on X

Power 2 programming comes as close to sport as you can get without playing the sport or simply sprinting. This bucket includes a lot of jumps, light medicine ball throws, and light resisted sprints. Power 2 is also the category that features the most overload or underload training for sport, such as weighted ball throws for quarterbacks, or underload shot put throwing. Power 2 is also the phase where we introduce the time parameter for sets rather than reps. This does two things:

1. It places the emphasis on speed, both in the eccentric and concentric movements. (Because, last time I checked, you don’t have a four-second eccentric on the playing field. It’s most often rapid.)
2. It adds in an autoregulation component. At this stage of training, athlete freshness is paramount because they are either in-season or getting ready to be.

With a time parameter, if the athlete’s CNS is fried from the day before, they will move slower and do fewer reps; if they feel great, they will move faster and do more reps. The key is simply a high level of intent on each exercise with each set. Athletes in a Power 2 block are often our most highly trained athletes—they know their way around the block at this point and have the mental capacity to give maximum effort and attention to each and every set.

The last real difference in Power 2 is the introduction of oscillatory training. Oscillatory training consists of small, rapid moves at a very specific joint angle. The distinction between high-level athletes and elite athletes is their ability to relax rather than contract their muscles. Oscillatory training teaches athletes to rapidly contract and relax antagonists, with their muscles in harmony. The most elite athletes in sport are the ones able to coordinate muscle contractions between their agonists and antagonists. Thus, it makes sense to train this quality in our block that resembles sport the most for athletes.

Where Are They Now and Where Are They Going?

Many people argue that with novice athletes you can do just about anything and they will get better. For the most part, that is true; on the flip side, however, the more advanced an athlete gets, the better the methods must be for that athlete to improve. The task, then, is to figure out what is the best way for an athlete to improve in the short term, without taking away from their long-term development.

Take Reagan, for example, a freshman in high school who weighs 120 pounds and throws the shot put. Sure, you can give him the French contrast method three days a week with a six-second eccentric, and if he doesn’t end up hurt, he will be a hell of a lot stronger in the coming months. Then what? After six months of progress, where do you go from there? What else can you give him?

If you pull out all the stops with an undertrained athlete, either they will end up hurt or you can’t give them anything else once they plateau. Alternately, take Connor, an Olympic-caliber shot put thrower. Sure, you can give him the latest 3×10 program that you found on Google, and he will probably get bigger or stronger at some point. But is he really getting better at shot put?

This is the challenge with individualization: You want to ensure the program fits an athlete’s needs, but you also want to establish that you are setting them up for long-term development. The main questions a coach must answer are:

1. Where are they now?
2. Where do they need/want to be?
3. When do they need to be there?

Once you ask these questions, you’ll have an idea of the work that needs to be done.

This is the challenge with individualization: You want to ensure the program fits an athlete’s needs but also establish that you are setting them up for long-term development, says @kingashton1. Share on X

The assessment and bucketing process is not an end-all, be-all; nor is it the only way to create individualized training programs. Coaches must still be able to reason their way through the process deductively and make sure their athletes are prepared for competition at the right time. However, using this method will allow coaches to be present on the training floor and coach their athletes on the execution of their programs.

The bucket system also gives coaches an objective benchmark for how their athletes are progressing throughout the course of the year (and year after year as well). Individuation is a great tool in a coach’s toolbox, but as with anything, too much can be a bad thing. With this process, a coach can ensure each athlete gets what they need, but it also keeps the coach in check as to not aim to get too “cute” with an athlete’s program.

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