Blog

Are your athletes training great but performing poorly? Do you find that sometimes their heads are getting in the way? Are they worrying about the future, such as the next competition or competitor? Have they mentioned negative thoughts racing through their minds?

If this is the case, how much time do you spend working on training the mental side of the game? If the above describes you or your athletes, there is hope—learning how to train the brain while training the body is the key to having a champion’s mindset.

As a licensed clinical social worker with a private therapy practice in the Philadelphia suburbs, I see anxiety with children and teens growing at an alarming rate. Anxiety is considered an epidemic right now among our youth, and athletes are not immune to this phenomenon. “Nearly 1 in 3 of all adolescents ages 13 to 18 will experience an anxiety disorder In the United States,” according to the National Institutes of Health. While athletes spend hours working on their physical preparation, game skills, and specific techniques, very little time is spent on “the mental game.”

As a therapist and a sprint coach, I see a great need for teaching our children and athletes how to exercise their brains in ways that will help them throughout life, says @jovif10. Share on X

As a therapist and a sprint coach, I see a great need for teaching our children and athletes how to exercise their brains in ways that will help them throughout life.

Mindset, Self-Regulation, Goal Setting, and Imagery

As the famous Yogi Berra saying goes, “Ninety percent of the game is half mental.” Others, meanwhile, have suggested that 90% of the game/sport is mental and 10% is physical. If this is true, we have reached a sad state of affairs in youth sports.

Parents will pay top dollar to give their children specific technical training, such as batting lessons, pitching lessons, etc., and send their kids to special trainers for speed and strength and to top club teams. However, very little (if any) time is spent working on the mental side of competing. Instead, that mental aspect is often neglected until an issue arises. Athletics does not appear to treat the mental aspect of training the same way they do the physical and technical.

It is not uncommon for a parent to wait until a pattern of underperforming or persistent anxiety before or during competitions forms before reaching out to me to get their child help. When I explore with parents what their child has been doing that helps in the area of mental training, most respond with “not much.” I have had numerous calls and emails from parents contacting me right before a big competition.

It is important to explain to parents and athletes that while this mental training does help, it is not instantaneous, and there are no quick fixes. Just like speed training, this also takes time to develop. Many coaches know this is an issue and realize the importance, but they find it hard to fit it in and/or do not know how to address it.

According to the American Psychological Association (APA), “sport psychology is a proficiency that uses psychological knowledge and skills to address optimal performance and well-being of athletes, developmental and social aspects of sports participation, and systemic issues associated with sports settings and organizations.” What often separates good athletes from great athletes is the time spent working on their mental game. Many elite athletes work with a sports psychologist or a mental skills coach in order to perfect the mental aspect of their game and/or sport. New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady—who has played in nine Super Bowls (winning six), with four picks as Super Bowl MVP, and 14 Pro Bowl appearances—started using mental coaching while still at the University of Michigan.

Working with a sports psychologist or mental skills coach helps athletes improve performance and consistency by working on their mindset (such as managing expectations and time management), their emotional regulation, and their use of imagery. Tom Brady is hardly unique, as elite athletes are no strangers to using mental skills to perfect their sports: In the 2014 Winter Olympics, the Canadians came to Sochi with eight sports psychologists, while the United States brought along nine (with five just for its snowboarding and ski programs alone). 

How Mindset Impacts Performance

“Negative thinking is almost 100% effective.” –Bob Rotella, sports psychologist

There are some common behaviors, emotions, and thinking patterns that can negatively affect an athlete’s performance. How an athlete thinks about an upcoming competition will significantly influence their attitudes, actions, and emotions. Coaches need to be able to recognize these factors and learn ways to address them.

An athlete’s state of mind can have an immense impact on sports performance, directing them to succeed or fail. Negative thinking is a thought process where individuals begin to see the worst in everything. Many athletes have a negative mindset without even realizing it—complaints about workouts, weather, performances, or coaches are all elements of a negative mindset. Maybe you’ve heard athletes say things like:

• We have to run in the rain?
• I can’t do this.
• This is too hard.
• The coach just doesn’t like me.

These are all examples of language that does more harm than good. These thoughts are like weeds that will choke out the positive beliefs if allowed to grow. The more we feed these negative thoughts, the stronger and more widespread they will get.

Let’s look at a visual I use with clients and athletes about negative thoughts, or what we also call cognitive distortions. There is a story (attributed by some to be an old Cherokee Indian legend) of two wolves that is a great illustration of a battle we all have in life. The story goes something like this:

An old Cherokee is teaching his grandson about life. “A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy. “It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves. One is evil—he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.”  

He continued, “The other is good—he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith. The same fight is going on inside you—and inside every other person, too.”

The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?”

The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”

You have a battle going on inside you that is eternal; it will always be there, so you need to learn how to deal with it. The first wolf is easy to feed and appears to be automatic for many. Once you start with a negative thought, they start coming quickly and multiply, and the bigger and stronger the “bad wolf” inside then gets. One negative thought feeds the next, which makes the thoughts stronger and more frequent!

You have a choice of which wolf you want to feed. When you feed the “good wolf,” the “bad wolf” gets weaker. Change the language you use and feed the good wolf. Start telling yourself positive messages, believe in your ability, and begin to move forward instead of being stopped by fear. This is a great lesson to teach our athletes on choosing to feed the right wolf and to practice these new messages on a regular basis. They will not believe it at first, but the more they stop the negative message and feed the “good wolf,” the weaker the “bad wolf” gets over time and loses its power.

The language you use on a regular basis has to be positive. Stopping the negative thoughts in their tracks as well as practicing positive thinking daily is key in having a positive mindset. Choosing to feed the “good wolf” is a change that will leave you feeling happier and healthier.

Staying positive is a skill, and we should work on it daily. An athlete can develop positive affirmations and thoughts in place of the negative thoughts and practice saying them several times a day. Eventually, they will begin to believe it and retrain their brain.

Negative thinking is a mental brick that weighs athletes down and keeps them from reaching their potential. Mental mistakes and setbacks are part of any sport, but if the athlete spends time thinking about the past or worrying about the future, they miss the present! They may be there physically, but they are not there mentally. It’s time to drop the mental brick, let the thought go, and refocus on the present moment.

One way an athlete can put a mistake, setback, or negative thought behind them is to learn to stay in the present. If you want your athletes to perform under pressure to the best of their ability, they need to practice and learn how to stay in the present.

If you want your athletes to perform under pressure to the best of their ability, they need to practice and learn how to stay in the present, says @jovif10. Share on X

“Mindfulness” is a popular term these days, but some people are not sure what it means: Mindfulness is being present without distraction. With the current generation’s on-the-go attitude, the distractions of social media, and the loads of academic work for student-athletes, being present is tough. Practicing mindfulness begins with learning to notice the distraction, letting it go, and then coming back to the present moment.

It may be helpful to develop a mental or physical reminder to assist in letting go and refocusing on the present moment. A method that was first made popular by Dr. Ken Ravizza, a professor of applied sports psychology at Cal State Fullerton, was to place a miniature toilet in the dugout for players of the 2004 Fullerton baseball squad to “flush” their mistakes and move on to the next play. That season the team went on to win the College World Series! Whether you use a visual of “dropping the brick” or “flushing it,” it can help athletes let go and refocus on the here and now.

Strategies for Emotional Regulation

“Believe me; the reward is not so great without the struggle.” –Wilma Rudolph, sprinter

Fear and anxiety can be significant mental blocks for many athletes. It is important for them to recognize anxiety and see how that emotion can push them to success or pull them down. Anxiety is a normal and natural part of life, but not when we are constantly anxious about everything. When we can learn to face adversity calmly, we will see great success.

Coaches should be able to not just recognize the negative thinking that occurs with anxiety but also understand the physiological symptoms: shortness of breath, feeling hot, racing heart, and feeling shaky are among the most prominent. If an athlete’s body responds to fear in these ways, they need to first calm their bodies and use self-regulation skills.

Self-regulation is when an individual gains physiological arousal back under control. Deep breathing (or belly breathing) is one way to help athletes self-regulate: Cue them to slowly breathe in through their nose and out through their mouth 10 times, and that will begin to calm them down.

Once the body is calm, they can then tackle the mind. Calm body = calm mind. You can even have the athletes add affirmations while breathing: My body is calm and relaxed, or I am calm and relaxed. Incorporating daily breathing activities into warm-ups or warm-downs can help athletes tremendously.

Fear of failure prevents many athletes from reaching their full potential. This year, I had a sprinter who was coming back from an injury lose a race before even getting to the starting line. During warm-ups, I saw it: fear in the eyes, sweating, dilated pupils, distraction. When checking in with them, they were feeding the “bad wolf” by remembering the last time they raced on that track and got the injury, complaining about being in lane 1, etc.

The sprinter went out and ran just as I expected—not reaching their full potential because their mind had convinced them otherwise. This fear can manifest itself by an athlete not trying as hard as they can or not trusting a coach and doing what is asked of them. These individuals may already have excuses for why they can’t do something, setting themselves up to fail.

Some athletes also exhibit a fear of success. Fear of success—who fears success? I know it may sound strange to some, but this is real. Some individuals are worried about the increased demands and expectations that accompany success. These athletes will do just enough to be good but will not push themselves further: They like to stay in the comfort zone.

With the fear of success also comes the fear of failure. Once an athlete succeeds, they may worry that this will be expected of them: What if they can’t do the same thing again? Someone who experiences this may compete in a very guarded manner, never really giving 100%. They never let themselves and others know what they are actually capable of.

There are a few strategies that can help in overcoming fear and getting your brain in the best mental shape possible:

1. Define what success is to you. Weed out what you think others want and expect and zone in on your definition of success.
2. Set goals and objectives to reach them. When setting goals, a good tool to use is SMART goals. These are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-framed. Make sure goals and objectives are realistic and individual—think about how good you want to be and how much effort you want to invest in the sport.
3. Break goals into daily, monthly, seasonal, and career goals. It is good to start with the long-term goal or the big goal and work your way backward. Then, look at the steps/objectives it will take to achieve this goal.

I like to encourage clients and athletes to make a vision board or map. When they can see what they are working toward, it motivates them and makes the goal more tangible.

It is important to expect setbacks and plan for them, says @jovif10. Share on X

Sometimes an athlete can have a setback, which is an event that they can’t get past: a missed ball, false start, getting beat in a race, missed pass, fumble, or an injury that they can’t seem to get out of their mind. When this happens, they are not fully present and hold themselves back. It is important to expect setbacks and plan for them. All athletes have setbacks and failures, so they should embrace this concept. Every setback has a setup—look for the setup.

Utilizing Guided Imagery

“Always turn a negative situation into a positive situation.” –Michael Jordan

Another popular strategy among elite athletes is visualization, or the use of guided imagery. Webster’s defines visualization as the “formation of mental visual images” and “the act or process of interpreting in visual terms or of putting into visible form.” Guided imagery is a relaxation technique based on visualizing pleasant things and body awareness to help individuals create sensory-rich images in their minds and bring about a desired physical response.

Including all the senses—sound, sight, smell, tactile, and taste—will deepen the experience and make it more realistic in the athlete’s mind. Research has shown that when an individual imagines themselves performing a task, the brain sends out electrical signals comparable to when the person actually does the task. Other studies have shown the practical impact that utilizing guided imagery can have on performance.

Athletes can use guided imagery or visualization by consciously controlling a script in their head as a technique to build up their best mental game. They can do this by spending time building resources of past successes and key performances, building future templates, and walking through the event step by step and practicing the skill perfectly.

A few years ago, I worked with a middle distance runner who was having some performance anxiety during competition. This athlete realized how her thoughts were holding her back and causing a lot of unpleasant physical sensations as well. As she was getting ready for the state meet, I helped her develop the perfectly imagined 800-meter run. It was important to incorporate all the senses and make it as real as possible, integrating her own language in the imagery and walking through that ideal race, step by step.

We brought in the temperature, the sounds of the crowd, the feel of the track, the sound of the starting gun, and the sight of the scoreboard, along with some other specifics just for her race. We also came up with key phrases that were unique and important to her, like “turn and burn,” to add to the guided imagery. We ran the script from the morning of the event all the way through the finish, experiencing the feel of winning the state meet.

The idea was to make it as authentic as possible, so it felt like it was really happening when she listened to it. I encouraged the athlete to listen to the script over and over, so that by the time of the big event she’d have already run it 100-plus times in her mind and would feel calm and confident. Can I just tell you the excitement and joy I experienced watching on TV as she ran the exact race we scripted? It was unbelievable! She then gave an interview to a newspaper and used the terms she came up with in the script when describing the race. When we talked later on, she didn’t even remember saying any of it—it was that automatic!

Guided imagery is not something you try once and hope it works, but something you must develop and practice regularly. Guided imagery is also perfect for athletes who are limited in practice due to injury or the amount of practice space. Incorporate guided imagery daily to be at your very best!

Exercise the Brain

“Life’s battles don’t always go to the stronger or faster man. But sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.” –Vince Lombardi

To be at the top of their game, athletes must exercise their brains daily: visualizing and mentally rehearsing how they want to feel, think, perform, and be. Coaches can encourage athletes to stay mindful and be in the present moment, teaching them to let go of the past, learn to be flexible, and adjust to surrounding conditions.

To be at the top of their game, athletes must exercise their brains daily: visualizing and mentally rehearsing how they want to feel, think, perform, and be, says @jovif10. Share on X

Have them change their internal dialogues and fill their brains with positive talk. Have them come up with a mantra and practice deep breathing daily. Tell them to be confident and always believe in themselves—great things will come if you work your brain like you work your body.

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 the last several years, there has been an apparent divide on social media about the best ways to train to obtain certain results. What has also become apparent is that, while both participants in the argument have typically had great results, they each advocate for polar extremes of training. Sprinting, for example, has a growing divide over whether to program excessive amounts of submaximal, high-volume tempo work or maximal intensity, low-volume sprint work. As discussed in my previous article, each approach has its pros and cons, but why does training have to be polarized? What makes one training approach right and another training approach wrong? One word: context.

When we talk about context in these conversations, we are often ignored by both training groups and swept under a rug in the discussion. If I approach the monotonous tempo crew and ask “Hey, what about max speed?”, I may get a sarcastic retort consisting of “What about it?” or they may disregard my argument by saying “We get our speed work in at meets!” If I approach the max speed crew and ask “What about endurance?”, I again get a sarcastic response of “What about it?” or my argument is met with the same solution: “We race into shape in meets!”

The irony of all of this is that they each answer my questions similarly, yet totally resent one another’s approach to training and refuse to entertain a happy medium. This middle ground approach, where I tend to be, allows me to use a more holistic training model that revolves around the context of the sport and each individual athlete. I tend to take valuable pieces from both camps of thought in order to design a more well-rounded program, addressing all aspects of speed development rather than one extreme or the other. It doesn’t have to be an either-or approach, and I think that is important to note.

While there is no single approach that will universally apply to everybody I train, I do have several foundational principles that I use when designing a training program. These pillars of my program help guide which approach I use while also encouraging constant reflection in order to refine decision-making to best serve the athlete. There is not an exhaustive list of principles in my training model, and it isn’t meant to devalue core concepts in anyone else’s program, but it contains just a few things that I’ve found particularly valuable over time. Here are six principles that are central to the way that I approach training.

1. Athletes First

A program centered around the athlete allows for you to home in on the most important qualities in the training equation. This is very multifaceted and can be as simple or complex as you make it. Ideally, you use the context around the athlete to direct your initial programming thoughts and build from there. This list contains (but is not limited to): training age, injury history, sport, position, practice schedule, prior training successes and failures, structural variance, current level of performance, and much more.

Contextual programming means that you address the things that matter most to the athlete and their performance in their respective sport(s). With this approach, you may choose to address similar qualities in different athletes with different workouts. Conditioning a soccer player should look much different than conditioning a football player. While speed training for track athletes may look similar to speed training for ball sports, there are components specific to track and field that may not be very useful for ball sport athletes.

Additionally, an athlete who has poor speed might be trained differently than an athlete with great speed. Younger and older athletes may not respond the same to similar training stimuli. While one might bounce back great, another might take a week to recover or even get injured. All of this is to say that a one-size-fits-all approach to training has not generally worked for me personally nor for my athletes. Taking the time to process information, backgrounds, and goals for each athlete I work with has helped guide my training and make it more meaningful overall.

Being mindful of the context behind what the athlete needs from me versus what I need from the athlete has made a large difference in individual responses to training stimuli, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

An athlete with an injury history, especially a lingering injury, should have a unique approach to training compared to an athlete with a clean bill of health. This is not to say that we need to necessarily baby the athlete, but there need to be attempts to strengthen any glaring insufficiencies in training prior to layering on a large workload. These training qualities include movement, strength, stability, endurance, balance, coordination, and much more. Being mindful of the context behind what the athlete needs from me versus what I need from the athlete has made a large difference in individual responses to training stimuli.

This same principle has held true for me in the physical therapy world. Many practitioners (me included) have fallen into a routine where they see a patient with a given ailment and give them similar treatments regardless of their current level of functioning and goals. When shifting the view to see the patient as a whole and providing holistic care, many notice patients are willing to do more, including doing their exercises at home and performing functional tasks as instructed more consistently. In my experience, it also seems to yield much better results both subjectively and objectively. Making the program make sense to the athlete sets you up for more trust in training and subsequent follow-through overall.

2. A Foundation of Movement

To me, sport and overall human performance are based around principles of various movement qualities to achieve success. Centering the way I train around this very basic idea has enabled me and many of my athletes to improve overall efficiency and decrease risk of injury.

One tendency I’ve seen frequently is for football players, and high schoolers in general, to be extremely devoted to the weight room. They train themselves to produce massive amounts of force, yet their performances tell me there is a disconnect somewhere. Focusing on movement economy allows these athletes with high force capabilities to recruit, orient, and utilize their force in more meaningful ways. Conversely, in my experience, poor movement and high forces have been recipes for disaster when it comes to unfavorable situations regarding hamstring injuries, shin splints, sub-optimal performances, and the like.

I have seen many schools of thought on social media try to discredit the importance of movement in overall performance; however, I just can’t see a situation where teaching an athlete to move like the fastest athletes in the world is detrimental. In my opinion, you need to learn the rules of sprinting prior to breaking them.

I just can’t see a situation where teaching an athlete to move like the fastest athletes in the world is detrimental. You need to learn the rules of sprinting prior to breaking them. Share on X

Help an athlete enhance their mastery of sprint technique and understanding of when to apply it, as this is a useful tool for them to have. For example, in team sports we hear a lot about how athletes rarely hit max speed positions that resemble elite sprinting in games. While I agree to an extent, there are times that having that ability is beneficial, especially as it pertains to making open field plays or breaking free against a defense. When in traffic, it is useful to have lower heel recovery, lower knees, and a generally lower center of mass as an athlete reads and reacts to an ever-changing situation. However, once the athlete has made their way out of traffic and has daylight to run, elite top speed mechanics would likely benefit the athlete more to break away rather than the stereotypical team sport movement patterns.

Video 1. While keeping an eye on movements live is effective and meaningful, being able to break down video of an athlete is critical. Not just to understand their habits, but video analysis can also help you determine potential sources of movement insufficiencies and direct your interventions.

3. A Supportive Environment

I attribute a lot of my personal success at both the high school and college levels to a training environment that was conducive to success. Successes were framed in a way that inspired me to keep working hard to improve, whereas things that may usually be seen as failures were presented by the coaches as opportunities to reflect, learn, and grow. My high school coach sent me a message after tearing my ACL and hitting rock bottom: “The way you handle adversity defines your character, you’ve got this!” This type of training environment has a reach that is greater than any single or group of training days. It extends to the person an understanding that while training in most locations is simply a sheet of paper or set of ideas that are tactfully implemented, there is more that goes into the training equation than just doing work, recovering, and repeating.

Athletes are humans with everyday issues like the rest of us, and these issues may manifest outside or within a given training session. This includes problems at home, school stresses, relationship problems, lingering injuries, social disparities, and much more, along with the pressures to perform well every day on their shoulders. Understanding how these complex experiences interact to disrupt sleep, diet, intent, motivation, execution, and other aspects of training may help you provide support in a more meaningful way to really bring out the best in your athletes in the face of all of these potential barriers.

Support does not have to be verbal but being able to read the room and having the ability to adjust your programming on the fly may prove to be more valuable than you might think. A good example is when an athlete clearly lacks energy, is unfocused, and seems tentative or distant. While asking probing questions may be beyond your comfort level, you can certainly adjust intensity, rest durations, overall volume, and the general content of the program to accommodate. You may be surprised at how well they respond to this approach.

Emulating this type of empathic, humanistic approach is very fulfilling and has been one of the biggest staples in my program for what I consider to be success. Surely there are a million ways to approach these delicate situations, and different coaches may feel more comfortable using one approach versus another. I think simply being aware and making safe, easily applicable adjustments in these circumstances will be beneficial to the athlete in some way.

4. Data Collection

The athlete-centered approach I take has led me to develop new ways to frame the training process for the athlete. While it is clear that the goal of training is to improve personal bests and peak performance, I also feel it is important to be consistently competitive with yourself on any given day of training. What I mean here is that while we are raising the ceiling, sometimes athletes can be consumed by the pursuit of hitting personal bests and, eventually, failure to do so may result in a negative sense of self.

I went in-depth on this in my previous article, but the premise is essentially that we can use data to change the athlete’s perception of what constitutes success, concern, and failure. While some may not consider these mindsets to be very important, I would argue that everything that precedes movement is influenced positively, neutrally, or negatively by the psychological state of mind, including things such as self-competence, self-efficacy, self-worth, excitement, motivation, and much more.

This is why I began to track rolling averages in addition to personal bests. When an athlete produces marks in training that are consistently above their rolling average, the personal bests will take care of themselves. The training progression is not linear, which is okay. Helping athletes understand that performances will ebb and flow has helped me keep overall intent, motivation, and performance levels high while also earning athletes’ trust in the process.

When an athlete produces marks in training that are consistently above their rolling average, the personal bests will take care of themselves, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

Celebrate all personal bests, but be sure to also celebrate those who consistently perform above the bar that they’ve set for themselves. More opportunities, along with wider windows for success, have helped my athletes have more positive training experiences overall along with improved psychological states throughout.

5. Adaptability

During any given session I monitor several things with each athlete to decide how to proceed with them individually or as a group. Sometimes this consists of 0- to 10-yard starts, jump testing, medicine ball throws, or just an eye test in general. As the data rolls in, I can compare it to their averages to understand more about their current state of performance as it stacks up with previous days, weeks, and months of information.

If it trends above their rolling average, I can continue things as planned and assume that the athlete is in a good physical state to perform that day. If the trends go in the wrong direction, I should be fluid in my plan for that day and opt for something with lower intensity and less volume and figure out how I’m going to make that day productive without negative consequences.

To me, low trends might indicate an athlete is sore, fatigued, burnt out, or having issues outside of the session. Some of these issues may consist of their diet, stress levels, sleep patterns, or other influences that may contribute to their relatively lower outputs. While there is nothing on any given training day that is going to exponentially accelerate the progress of performance, there are an infinite number of things that can totally derail any progression that may be occurring. In the end, it is not worth pushing an athlete to their limit when they are in this physical state. There is much more to be lost than gained in these situations, and in my experience, it is more beneficial to opt for a “less is more” approach to combat what I see.

If the athlete is not ready to adapt to the training stimulus for the day, you may cast them further into a training deficit and prolong their eventual recovery and subsequent readiness to train at a high level. The CNS may just need an additional day of lower workloads or to take time away completely in order to bounce back. While this might be frustrating for the athlete, I believe it lowers the risk of injury and prevents more long-term training complications.

6. Self-Reflection

Many coaches have what they call the “bread and butter” of their program. What I mean by this is there are typically a few aspects of training that are staples in a given program and are uncompromisable and irreplaceable. For me, those staples include improving maximum speed, acceleration capabilities, movement economy, and overall power, among a few other things. Another concept that is important to me is pursuing the minimal effective dose in training the athletes I work with. I always look to maximize my return on investment, as I typically have very little time with them to work on various things.

A pitfall I eventually ran into was continuing to invest time into things that yielded diminishing returns. At one point, athletes coming to my sessions knew that they would either be doing fly 10-yard sprints or 40-yard dashes along with an array of other things on any given day. When the time I invested in this training structure began to show a plateau in results, I was stubborn and continued to implement the same training strategies over and over. I mean, these were my staples! This is what I was known for! Surely compromising these aspects of programming would be too costly to my identity. It was a difficult situation to navigate.

Eventually I was able to see that even though these metrics are extremely valuable, there may be a better use of time in other domains that would still complement the important qualities I was after. We still sprinted at high intensities and frequently, but I had to scrap my simplified approach because athletes were hitting a wall. I thought to myself that the emphasis had to change periodically, similar to the way that we see many coaches periodize programming in the weight room. What I mean by this is that I began changing the overarching themes so that all of my eggs weren’t in one or two baskets all the time.

Had I not possessed the ability to admit I was wrong, my athletes would have wasted time pouring their hearts and souls into workouts that were not yielding the results they used to. Share on X

By cycling through various themes and training densities, accessory components to speed began to improve along with speed itself. This isn’t to say I’ve gotten away from max sprinting, just that I’ve decided to complement the max speed work with other components. I’ve found that when training athletes this way, they tend to tolerate greater volumes of high-quality training while also improving beyond the plateau we seemed to hit with a relatively one-dimensional approach.

Understanding that my niche approach wasn’t universally applicable was the first step in addressing this issue. Initially, it hurt my pride to change my approach, but now I hold very strong feelings about self-reflection and using it frequently to grow. Had I not possessed the ability to admit I was wrong, my athletes would have continued to beat their heads against the wall as they wasted time pouring their hearts and souls into workouts that were not yielding the results they used to.

Develop Your Own Principles

These six principles have helped me become more well-rounded and mindful, and in tune with the athletes I work with, so that I can program in such a way that lays my ego aside in order to do what is best for them. It has helped me hold myself accountable and pushed me to continue evolving as athletes continue to come to me with unique circumstances and individual needs. Being able to identify these needs can be a challenging process but doing so allows me to prioritize certain elements of the training program to push the athlete in a meaningful direction.

I challenge you to come up with a handful of principles of your own that will push you to continue to grow and provide better training opportunities and experiences for the athletes you work with. Share on X

I understand that these principles may not be universally applicable or practical for everybody, and that is okay. I challenge you to come up with a handful of principles of your own that will push you to continue to grow and provide better training opportunities and experiences for the athletes that you work with. Please share them with me if you do, as I know that I don’t have the perfect program, and there are valuable lessons to be learned from everyone. If you consistently stay informed and are able to choose a training approach that works for you and provides objective results for your athletes, I think you will be well on your way to success. There are many roads to Rome—never forget that!

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

Track and field has always been interesting to me due to the nature of the sport. We are the purest form of athletics. We do not rely on a team, ball, or score. The clock and the measuring tape do not lie, and thus every detail must be cultivated and cared for properly.

For me, the weight room has always been a major part of the puzzle. While there may be no one-size-fits-all coaching, the weight room certainly fits into programming for every athlete I have ever coached, whether they are competing on the world stage or developing in their events.

I have had my athletes in a weight room up to five times a week in my career with three days focused on neural training design and two days focused on general training design using regional lifts. I am not shy about being in there often.

The improvements in injury prevention, coordination, blood chemistry, and sprint and jump performances cannot be overlooked. While I believe in a multilateral training system, and that the parts always have to line up to create a complimentary and compatible system, weightlifting cannot and should not be left out of the equation at any level.

Weightlifting cannot and should not be left out of the equation at any level, says @Jake_co. Share on X

In his Freelap Friday article, Todd Lane said track coaches are just full-time strength and conditioning coaches. I couldn’t agree more. If I were doing my same job with a football team that’s what I would be called, and I wouldn’t have to do things much differently except account for athletes with bigger bodies.

Like most track and field coaches, I have always felt it was important for me to have a hand in our weight room programming. Early on in my career I realized I was going to be working in the weight room with my athletes and wanted people to take me seriously, so I earned a CSCS from the NSCA.

I was lucky to start my career as a volunteer for Amy Deem and Calvin Robinson at the University of Miami. In my opinion, they are two of the best in the business. I went through the coaching education system and could not even have begun to write an article like this without the wisdom of Boo Schexnayder.

I am blessed now to work with Chase Madison under the guidance of coach Mike Turk and our head strength and conditioning coach Jim Zielinski, all of whom not only support the work we do in the weight room here, but believe in it as well.

We agree: sprinters and jumpers should all be in the weight room.

Historical Context

Weight room topics of conversation always seem to turn into a debate. However, no one has reinvented the wheel in quite some time, and similarly most weight room protocols were created decades and sometimes even centuries ago. What has changed significantly, though, especially as of late, is the accessibility of these resources, and the increased number of people trying to prove why their methods work.

The human body is a collaboration of many systems, and every practitioner knows that every athlete is different. Between various training ages, misinformation, the influence of performance-enhancing drugs, and the absence of objective evaluation of training systems, defining what works and what doesn’t is subjective. Many coaches have a success story that is attributed to some magical workout or exercise, when in reality, a full picture is needed to properly evaluate it.

Many coaches have a success story that is attributed to some magical workout or exercise, when in reality, a full picture is needed to properly evaluate it, says @Jake_co. Share on X

The arms race of the sport performance and sport science industry has muddled the picture even further. Plenty of strength coaches have begun to market themselves and create catchy names for their systems. This coupled with social media has turned many coaches more focused on being marketers and entrepreneurs than trying to improve sport performance.

I may be the old man yelling at the clouds at this point, but from what I have seen over the years, most of the things people think are cool or new on social media are the opposite of that; they are small parts of an already-existing training program that people package as a miracle drug for the masses.

Why Lifting Matters

When I send my athletes into the weight room, they are leaving the track. It is a weight room. It is not a track room. Things that go on in the weight room do not have to look like the 100-meter dash or the long jump. The goal of the weight room is to supplement what is happening on the track to help reach your key performance indicators.

It is a weight room. It is not a track room. Things that go on in the weight room do not have to look like the 100-meter dash or the long jump, says @Jake_co. Share on X

Weight room velocity is another topic of debate. I have consistently heard bad opinions about athletes not being able to move a bar in the weight room fast enough to be relevant to track speeds and velocities. People will muse about Carl Lewis not lifting and directly apply that to their rationale to keep their athletes out of the weight room.

I am lucky enough to have a Vmaxpro along with some other velocity-measuring devices available to me, but I have never once looked at any of our velocity tracking devices and thought to myself, Man, that is close to our top-end speed.

Intensive tempo running, medicine ball routines, general strength, and many other commonly-used training modalities also do not employ speeds near top-end for a sprinter or jumper, but that doesn’t mean they’re not effective. We simply use technology to make sure we are on track with the factors we are looking for.

Metrics

While I am not looking for weight room movements that mirror those on the track, I am looking for metrics that will improve performance. Power development, absolute strength, and rate of force development are the main contributors to movements that will occur on the track.

Yet if you do not have a well-rounded system that teaches mechanics, employs intensity and plyometrics, and builds track-related skills such as acceleration development, absolute speed, and speed endurance properly, none of this matters. However, if you are building athletes properly on the track, these will improve your athletes’ sprinting and jumping skill.

Power Development

I am in the position of training athletes with experience. While I often joke that some people who arrive in college with decent marks act like they just began training, the obvious truth is that they have more mature bodies and have generally been competing for some time.

We start power development from day one. Even if I was working with younger athletes, I would do the same thing. Power development pairs well with acceleration training and is the major factor in overcoming inertia. We use Olympic lifts in the weight room to help develop this along with our multi-jumps, multi-throws, and intense sprinting. We utilize this all year to some degree.

I liken it to my North Star, as no matter how far we are away from home base, I always return to power training through Olympic lifting protocols. Power development lays the groundwork to build strength for the rest of the year.

I liken it to my North Star, as no matter how far we are away from home base, I always return to power training through Olympic lifting protocols, says @Jake_co. Share on X

The nice thing about Olympic lifts are there are basically no short-term or long-term negative effects. The fatigue or loss of coordination that can come from bilateral static movements is nonexistent with these lifts. While peak power is gone after step three, we are still trying to move the ceiling on this all the time.

Absolute Strength Development

Absolute strength is one of the more debated topics I find on my timeline. Sometimes people aren’t even trying to attack it on purpose but end up doing it because of misunderstandings.

I believe my weight room approach could best be described as meat and potatoes. I say that because we will only do two-to-three lifts per day on our main lifts that have major central nervous system involvement. We get in and get out.

We squat. I mainly use the squat to build up to absolute strength development. Early in the year, we have protocols that use adequate recovery times to maintain power outputs throughout the lifts. Because we load these pretty adequately throughout the year, I keep things simple.

I’m flexible, too: I could probably find a way to do anything anyone has ever talked about in the weight room. It just depends when and how it fits.

Once we have gotten through absolute strength protocols, I discontinue use of heavy statics for the rest of the year. We will switch to ballistic movements like the squat jump, always weighted appropriately depending on depth, to maintain these levels of strength we built while not having to deal with the fatigue, soreness, and potential loss of coordination.

I think it is important to address an elephant in the room on squats, because they have gotten a bad reputation in some circles due to their negative side effects.

One of the most debated topics with squats is depth. We employ below-parallel-depth squats once a week in our general prep and specific prep periods to create tissue tensions at ranges that are not generally stressed in track and field.

All the protocols I employ are specific to the time of the year and what we are doing on the track. We discontinue squats once we start competing to protect the athletes from getting hurt.

That does not mean squatting hurts athletes, but squatting at improper times of the year can. Employing max-velocity runs in-season with too high of a density level can cause the same issues, so this is not just a squatting issue—it’s a training plan issue.

Metabolic and Blood Chemistry

One of the biggest misunderstandings about weightlifting is what is trying to be accomplished. Compatible training designs can vastly affect blood chemistry and the neuroendocrine system. To me, this is one of the most important reasons to be in a weight room. Nervous system activation is right along with this, and the nervous system is generally the biggest difference between higher-level athletes.

While people have begun to understand that you cannot necessarily separate out energy systems, they have forgotten that the complexity of the body requires all of its systems to work together to be successful. When viewing the weight room specifically through the types of contractions or muscles used, people often forget that you are causing other systems to work and be expressed as well.

Steroids are often still thought of as something that makes you stronger, but in most cases they just give you the ability to recover faster to train harder. By using the weight room, we can elicit similar legal effects if used properly.

Power schemes early in the year such as 6×5 on Olympic lifts coupled with slightly lower recoveries than full can teach the body to buffer low levels of lactic acid. Testosterone is often produced on neural-based training schemes in the weight room that have high intensities with plenty of recovery.

The proper use of body building motifs (12-24 exercises x 10-12 reps with no more than 90” recovery) can help facilitate recovery from hard running sessions on a more general training day. Higher-repetition schemes with lower intensities can facilitate growth hormone production which is even more important for younger athletes.

Too many coaches take credit for their athletes’ success when it was really just due to natural maturation of the body; however, employing these training schemes with youth can speed up training age and maturation effectively. And, if done properly, will not add unnecessary mass through hypertrophy.

Adaptations that you are looking for can be directly facilitated through proper schemes in the weight room with proper planning.

Injury Prevention

Athletes can absolutely protect their bodies by being in the weight room. When I see injuries on the track, they usually come from one of three places: poor lifestyles, poor mechanics, or poor training design by the coach.

When I see injuries on the track, they usually come from one of three places: poor lifestyles, poor mechanics, or poor training design by the coach, says @Jake_co. Share on X

The intensity of training in the weight room and high levels of tissue tension will help the athlete get ready for the rigors of meets and higher-intensity work as the season progresses. Many injuries to soft tissue that occur during the competitive season are due to lack of planning in the fall. By utilizing the weight room effectively, you can start to mitigate soft tissue injuries.

High levels of tension in muscles will not only improve nervous system function and its ability to send electrical signals to the muscle, but will help the whole system. This also will create benefits to connective tissue. While this can also be done through some higher-level plyometrics, these changes can start occurring immediately upon training instead of having to build long-term plyometric planning.

Plyometrics should also be done, but those are to be done on the track. Intensity can also be manipulated throughout the year by increasing bar speed, not just by manipulating the load on the bar.

Coaches should keep things simple in the weight room but still provide variability. With the repetitive nature of track and field training, slightly changing stimuli can keep athletes hitting a proverbial wall. The body craves new stimuli, and adjusting a lift, rep ranges, or even starting or catch positions are easy ways to keep the body learning and changing.

Moving in different planes and in larger ranges of motion, with or without weight, are great ways to maintain soft tissue and connective tissue health. We constantly must find ways to fight the repetitive nature of most track and field training and this is a great tool to do so.

We constantly must find ways to fight the repetitive nature of most track and field training, says @Jake_co. Share on X

However, these plans can be limited by mobility issues. We address these on a case-by-case basis with the long-term goal to reach our desired range of motion. We will not put athletes in positions where they show lumbar lordosis.

Ankle mobility is another limiting factor in squat depth, but Carl Valle wrote a great article on why this is not as big of a deal as people think. We also never work to the point where we are specifically trying to get tired, so maintaining these positions is generally not that difficult.

Finally, track and field is a sport known for having bone issues in many populations, especially with female athletes. Lifting weight, especially above your head, and catching an Olympic movement have shown a positive correlation to bone health and density. Having to yield a fast-moving bar in a position can have many benefits to learning and skill development.

We are not in the days of throwing medicine balls at people’s stomachs anymore, but the idea of catching a clean still can provide feedback to the body that will help it stay healthy and get used to absorbing shock.

Other Benefits

Coordination loss may be a short-term issue in bilateral static lifts, but over the long term gains can be accelerated in the weight room through Olympic lifts. While Frans Bosch has pushed the idea of using lifts specifically to be coordinated resistance work, I think base Olympic lifts cause enough proprioceptive awareness and are complicated movements that push the envelope, and help the nervous system learn aiding in coordination.

Core strength is another overlooked outcome of the weight room. Many people spend hours on the track doing various flexion, extension, or bracing movements, but refuse to go into the weight room even though core strength can be improved there.

Track to the Rack

The weight room is an important part of any well-balanced training program. While I do not believe you can be successful with just the weight room, it needs to be part of your plan.

Unfortunately, people have moved away from the weight room mostly due to misunderstandings and improper timing of the stimuli being trained, but proper programming makes the weight room a huge advantage for those who are willing to walk onto the rack.

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

Gone are the days when a single factor is touted as the holy grail of hamstring injury prevention. Hamstring injuries are multifactorial, meaning strength coaches must take a broad approach to injury prevention.

The only thing worse than a hammy pull is more than one. Unfortunately, hamstring injuries are notorious for being consistent problems, with a recurrence rate as high as 63%.¹ A single hamstring injury can spell doom for an athletic career, robbing an athlete of training and game time both now and in the future.

The only thing worse than a hammy pull is more than one. Unfortunately, hamstring injuries are notorious for being consistent problems, with a recurrence rate as high as 63%, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

A recent paper by Lahti et al. describes a unique, individualized approach to hamstring injury prevention that can be implemented at the team level.² I believe the intervention was underway when the COVID-19 pandemic struck and unfortunately ended the study, so the group instead published the protocol with intention to complete it when the pandemic ceases.

The intervention looks promising, covering many topics including mobility, sprint mechanics, and strength, among others. It will be exciting to see the completed project and understand how effective the protocol is.

In the meantime, we’re left with the approach the intervention takes, the two novel assessments the authors put forth, and the thoughts the paper provokes.

Screening and Intervening: the Exercise is the Rehab and the Rehab is the Exercise

One striking aspect of the Lahti et al. paper is how the intervention addresses the players deemed at-risk for hamstring injury. What should those athletes do?

The same as the athletes who are not at-risk. Just more of it.

The protocol calls for all athletes to receive a healthy dose of range of motion, strength, lumbopelvic control, and sprint work, but those who meet the criteria get a double dose compared to those who don’t.

This underscores the necessity for well-balanced, well-planned training. There is no magic bullet or fancy exercise that vaccinates against hamstring pulls. Instead, there are basic foundational qualities and competencies that should be practiced, maintained, and improved upon throughout the training year. Rather than waiting for a red flag to pop up, strength coaches can nip these issues in the bud by training these qualities before they become problems.

Asymmetrical Presentation Calls for Asymmetrical Loading

Asymmetries in force production are thought to be contributing factors to hamstring injury.^3,4 At least one study has directly linked eccentric hamstring strength with risk of hamstring injury.⁵ The authors tested glute hip extensor and hamstring strength in elite sprinters and followed up with them over a one-year period. Each of the six hamstring injuries observed happened in the weaker hamstring. Thus, symmetrical force production capabilities appear protective against injury.

As mentioned above, the protocol in the Lahti et al. paper calls for several aspects of performance to be assessed. If asymmetries were present in strength or range-of-motion (ROM), athletes performed extra work on the lagging leg. There was not a magical intervention to “correct” asymmetry; rather, all athletes perform strength and mobility work, and athletes with asymmetries simply do more of it.

All athletes perform strength and mobility work, and athletes with asymmetries simply do more of it, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Misdiagnosing asymmetry and mistakenly programming more work on one side could actually cause asymmetry, and valid and reliable measurements are critical. The old pull-into-my-hand, this-side-feels-weaker muscle test isn’t going to cut it as a valid measurement and probably won’t be convincing when trying to persuade an athlete why they should perform three sets of single-leg deadlifts on one leg and only one set on the other.

Isokinetic dynamometry or another valid, reliable assessment that clearly and objectively shows force production capability is the best way to get athlete buy-in, to be fully informed as a practitioner, and to prescribe efficacious training interventions.

The Jurdan Test

How much ROM is necessary to reduce the risk of hamstring injury? This question is not currently answered, but we can safely assume that possessing enough mobility to enter archetypal maximum velocity positions allows an athlete to effectively reach said positions and is therefore protective against hamstring injury. A little extra ROM to add wiggle room and ensure the athlete isn’t hitting end range with each stride is also probably a good thing.

The authors of the Lahti paper introduce the Jurdan test, a novel sprint-specific mobility assessment named after its originator Jurdan Mendiguchia. The test places the athlete in an artificial toe-off sprint position, which becomes clear when you rotate the picture 90°, and assesses swing leg hamstring range of motion and stance leg hip extensibility in relationship to maximum sprint mechanics.

For the start position of the test, the athlete lies supine on a table with a posterior pelvic tilt, their bottom leg hanging passively off the table, and their top leg femur set plumb vertical. From there, the athlete extends their top leg knee as far as possible while keeping their lower back visibly flat and pressed into the table.

Appropriate scores do not yet exist, as this test is brand new, but there are obvious implications: if an athlete cannot extend the knee to achieve a desirable strike position then their hamstring mobility is a liability, may increase injury risk, and should be addressed.

Moreover, without adequate ROM at the knee or hip, affordances are limited and athletes will never reach the desired maximum velocity kinematics, leaving you frustrated as a coach and the athlete slower than they should or could be. Perhaps this is one cause of chronic backside kinematics: the ROM at the hip or knee simply isn’t available for the athlete to perform ideal frontside mechanics.

Be aware when scoring the test that the same score may be achieved via two movement strategies. For instance, a shin angle of 60° – (-10°) hip extension yields a score of 70°, but so does a shin angle of 73° – 3° of hip flexion. The latter circumstance occurs if an athlete cannot enter hip extension.

The Kick-back Method

If you’re reading this article, I don’t need to convince you that sprint mechanics matter.

Lahti et al. present a novel method to quantify frontside versus backside mechanics: the kick-back score.

Although there is not a definitive answer at this point, the hypothesis is that backside mechanics increase risk of hamstring injury more than frontside mechanics. The kick-back score provides an objective method to track progress in technical improvements and allows coaches to separate athletes into groups of frontside and backside dominant for training purposes.

Exposure to High Speeds

Track and field sprinters usually sprint at maximum velocity weekly, but team sport athletes do not always reach maximum velocity regularly. Malone et al.⁶ found a U-shaped relationship between high-speed sprint volume and hamstring injury risk. Not enough exposure to high-speed sprinting increased the likelihood of hamstring injury, but so did too much. There appears to be a sweet spot in the middle that is protective.

Not enough exposure to high-speed sprinting increased the likelihood of hamstring injury, but so did too much. There appears to be a sweet spot in the middle that is protective, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

This seems to make sense both on an intuitive and a physiologic level. Mama always said too much of a good thing can be a bad thing, and sprinting itself is eccentric exercise for the hamstring group, which will be discussed in greater detail later in this article.

The only problem? We don’t have a handbook to tell us exactly how to program high-speed programming to prevent injuries. How much is too much? How much is too little?

The authors of the Malone et al. paper do highlight two important factors: athletes with high chronic training loads are at reduced risk, and players who experience “large weekly changes” in high-speed sprint exposures are at higher risk. In other words, iron forges iron, and consistent high-speed sprinting forms a robustness against hamstring injury, while doing very little followed by a ton of it increases risk.

Iron forges iron, and consistent high-speed sprinting forms a robustness against hamstring injury, while doing very little followed by a ton of it increases risk, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Classify Strength Training by Joint Angle

It is well-known that strength training adaptations are joint-angle specific and some exercises strengthen a particular ROM of a movement more than others. This is why the general rule of thumb is to train through a full range of motion, so athletes experience strength gains in the largest ROM possible.

Lahti et al. separate hip extension training into three categories: 0-60° (extended position), 60-90° (mid-range), and 90-110° (deep). Below are a few exercises they name for each:

• 0-60°: hip thrust, glute bridge, back extension
• 60-90°: deadlift, trap bar deadlift, high sled push, high step up
• 90-110°: split squat and split squat variations, RDL, low sled push

What is the value in categorizing exercise as such? Perhaps exercises are most transferrable at specific joint-angles.

For instance, in the initial steps of an acceleration—whether out of blocks or from a two-point stance—the knee and hip travel through a greater range of motion during ground contact than in upright mechanics, terminating in complete or near-complete hip extension for at least the first few steps. Thus, all three categories of exercises are applicable, as the hip moves through all three ranges of motion. If strength training neglects any of these ROM categories, improvements in acceleration may be compromised.

Similarly, archetypal front side maximum velocity mechanics call for a relatively high swing leg knee at toe-off, with the thigh at roughly 90°. Perhaps exercises in the deep and mid-range categories are most appropriate for building the base of strength needed to achieve high angular velocity of the thigh as the foot travels downwards to initiate ground contact.

Further, hamstring exercises are sub-categorized into “knee over hip” movements and “hip over knee” movements. “Hip over knee” describes movement in which the hip extends with a relatively fixed knee angle. Romanian deadlifts, straight leg cable pulls, and isometrics in an extended hip position fit into this category. These exercises seem to mimic the hip extensors driving the foot down towards the ground during swing phase.

In “Knee over hip” movements, knee flexion is the driver of the work. Nordic hamstring curls (eccentric knee flexion) and hamstring sliders fall in this category. These exercises seem to contribute most to preventing the knee from extending open during the swing phase so the foot is in position to be effectively driven towards the ground.

Lumbopelvic Control

Tilting the pelvis anteriorly lengthens the hamstrings and encourages backside sprint mechanics. Lumbopelvic control—in this context, the ability to maintain a neutral pelvis while sprinting—is thought to be a key kinematic protector of hamstring injury. Higher relative activity of glute and trunk musculature (the muscle groups that prevent anterior pelvic tilt) during flight phase has been negatively associated with hamstring injury risk.⁷

Video 1. Pelvic tilts. Pelvic anterior / posterior tilts are a basic motor control exercise. Without conscious control of the pelvis independent of the lumbar spine, pelvic control cannot be expected at all. This drill serves as an introduction to lumbopelvic training and awareness.

Whether anterior pelvic tilt is the result of a motor control or a strength deficit, lumbopelvic exercises provide the context and physiologic requirements to maintain a neutral pelvis while sprinting.

We’re essentially talking about strengthening the hollow body position: ribs depressed and pelvis neutral or in a slight posterior tilt.

I group lumbopelvic control into four basic categories:

• Basic motor control
• Static isometric strength
• Dynamic isometric strength
• Competition movements (like sprinting)

In my experience, many athletes (especially youth athletes) lack the awareness to move the pelvis independent from the lumbar spine. They need to be taught how to tilt anteriorly and posteriorly as opposed to leaning forwards and back. Basic motor control competency is often the starting point of training.

Video 2. The deadbug teaches lumbopelvic disassociation and strengthens the trunk musculature that prevents anterior pelvic tilt while sprinting. Athletes begin on their back, posteriorly tilt the hips and depress the rib cage, and then flatten the lower back against the ground. This position is held as the knees and arms are put into the air. For bonus points, exhale forcefully as if blowing up a balloon while actively depressing the ribs.

Below are a few examples of exercises in each category.

• Basic motor control: pelvic anterior / posterior and lateral tilts
• Static strength: hollow body holds, deadbug, planks, side planks
• Dynamic strength: overhead step ups, overhead A-skips, stir the pot, marching deadbug, split squats
• Competitive movement: sprinting

Video 3. Overhead step-ups act to strengthen hip extensor musculature while promoting a lumbopelvic position appropriate to upright sprinting.

Video 4. The overhead A-skip challenges the coordinative abilities necessary to maintain a neutral pelvis while sprinting.

Any exercise can be a lumbopelvic control exercise if the goal and focus is directed there. Plyos like skips, hops, split jumps, and single leg bounding could be considered advanced dynamic strength exercises, so long as the athlete is encouraged to maintain a healthy relationship between the pelvis and lumbar spine.

Video 5. The marching deadbug is a progression to the standard deadbug. The key is to hold the position while the legs are moving. That is, do not allow the pelvis to tilt or the ribs to rise while marching. To make this drill more challenging, reach the heel further from the body.

Video 6. The hollow body hold is another advanced version of the deadbug. Maintain a posterior pelvic tilt and depressed rib cage while assuming a V-shaped posture. Hold it steady.
Any exercise can be a lumbopelvic control exercise if the goal and focus is directed there, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Eccentric Strength

I would be remiss to not mention the Nordic hamstring curl. It is not going to single-handedly prevent all hamstring injuries, as was perhaps once thought, but the data is clear that when added to a well-rounded strength and conditioning program it does have a preventative effect.^8-11

It is not entirely clear why this is, and skeptics are quick to point out that the exercise does not visually appear to have much transfer to sport (it doesn’t look functional). While it does not resemble a sport-specific movement, it does replicate the eccentric demands placed on the hamstring musculature during the swing phase of sprinting. Further, eccentric exercise is known to induce sarcomerogenesis, the lengthening of fascicles, which allows for greater force to be produced at longer muscles lengths.

Given that hamstring injuries are thought to occur at lengthened positions, the ability to generate (or withstand) high forces in lengthened positions has a strong physiologic rationale as protective against hamstring injuries.

The beauty with Nordics is that they don’t take much. As little as two or three sets of five reps two-to-three times per week will decrease the likelihood of hamstring injury.

Triceps Surae Strength

A history of ankle sprains have been linked to increased risk of hamstring injury.¹² It is not clear whether the ankle sprain itself makes the hamstring group more vulnerable or if both injuries are manifestations of the same underlying causal factor(s).

Video 7. Split stance heel raise iso holds: The hardest easy-looking exercise you’ll ever do. Prop the ball of your foot up, assume a split stance so that the thigh is parallel to the floor and the shin is vertical, and raise your heel as high as possible. Hold for 30s on each side.

Strengthening the triceps surae group may be protective of ankle injury and can certainly have performance benefits. Concentric, eccentric, and isometric exercises are all beneficial, but isometrics are of particular relevance to sprint performance. Lahti et al. outline isometric holds at 90°, 110°, and “high plantar flexion,” presumably instructing athletes to raise the heel as high as possible.

Video 8. Split stance heel raises: Same setup and the split stance heel raise iso holds, but with a 1-1-1-tempo. Raise the heel as high as possible, and control it on the way down.

Further, isolating the soleus is of interest. The gastrocnemius is a highly active plantar flexor when the knee is extended, as in standing calf raises, and the soleus is less of a contributor in this position. The gastroc produces less force when the knee is flexed, making the soleus the heavy hitter in this position. Isometric holds and calf raises from a flexed knee position, like a split stance, are great ways to build soleus strength and improve fortitude against ankle and hamstring injury.

Aerobic Health

Aerobic health has also been linked with decreased risk of hamstring injury.⁶ Why might this be?

Fatigue changes things. Mental processes like decision-making and mechanics are modified by fatigue. This is evident to anyone who has ever trained or played hard.

Greater aerobic fitness delays the onset of fatigue, which delays injurious alterations to kinematic and decision-making processes. Less game time in fatigued conditions means less time spent in the danger zone of injury. Likewise, lower absolute fatigue during intense gameplay also reduces risk.

Less game time in fatigued conditions means less time spent in the danger zone of injury. Likewise, lower absolute fatigue during intense gameplay also reduces risk, says @KD_KyleDavey. Share on X

Developing “cardio” in athletes who play sports predominated by anaerobic processes is often criticized. However, understanding that athletes who are in “better shape” are less likely to get hurt certainly warrants aerobic training during the offseason.

Team Programming: the Percentile Approach

It would be nice if absolute values existed for the several risk factors discussed in this article. But they don’t.

To accommodate for this, one can take the percentile approach. This is particularly useful when working with a large group of athletes, like a team, but can also be applied to individual athletes once enough data points have been collected.

The method is simple: measure everybody and split them up into thirds or quartiles and prescribe individualized programs from there. For instance, say you’re measuring hamstring strength with a dynamometer or ROM with an active straight leg raise. You can predetermine that the bottom quartile—the weakest and least flexible athletes—will get more strength and mobility work than the others.

If you don’t have a whole team available to test, begin testing your athletes one-by-one and eventually you will have a database you can use for a ranking system.

While not a perfect system, it does provides an avenue to identify the top and bottom performers within a group and program from there.

Putting it all Together: Programming for Hamstring Injury Prevention

If hamstring injuries were simple, this article would have one subheader. Needless to say, there’s a lot to consider when programming with the intent of preventing hamstring injury.

Recognizing every athlete, sport, and time of year will look different, throwing out a sample calendar with a daily training gameplan will be of little use to you.

What you can do, however, is run through the below checklist to make sure you’re hitting each of these categories once per week at an absolute minimum:

• Hip and knee ROM
• Sprint mechanics
• High-speed sprinting
• Strength training at different working angles
• Eccentric strengthening of the hamstrings
• Lumbopelvic control
• Triceps surae strength
• Aerobic development

If you don’t tick each of these items off the list as you review your training plan, it’s time to go back to the drawing board.

Hamstring injuries are nasty, recurring injuries that stifle, if not end, athletic careers. The time lost in training and gameplay can be irrecuperable.

To best protect yourself and your athletes, take a multifaceted approach and cover all your bases. Your hammies will thank 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

References

1. De Visser, H. M., Reijman, M., Heijboer, M. P., & Bos, P. K. (2012). Risk factors of recurrent hamstring injuries: a systematic review. British Journal of sports medicine, 46(2), 124- 130.

2. Lahti, J., Mendiguchia, J., Ahtiainen, J., Anula, L., Kononen, T., Kujala, M., … & Edouard, P. (2020). Multifactorial individualised programme for hamstring muscle injury risk reduction in professional football: protocol for a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open    Sport & Exercise Medicine, 6(1), e000758.

3. Girard, O., Brocherie, F., Morin, J. B., & Millet, G. P. (2017). Lower limb mechanical asymmetry during repeated treadmill sprints. Human movement science, 52, 203-214.

4. Brown, S. R., Feldman, E. R., Cross, M. R., Helms, E. R., Marrier, B., Samozino, P., & Morin, J. B. (2017). The potential for a targeted strength-training program to decrease asymmetry and increase performance: a proof of concept in sprinting. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(10), 1392-1395.

5. Sugiura, Y., Saito, T., Sakuraba, K., Sakuma, K., & Suzuki, E. (2008). Strength deficits identified with concentric action of the hip extensors and eccentric action of the hamstrings predispose to hamstring injury in elite sprinters. Journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy, 38(8), 457-464.

6. Malone, S., Owen, A., Mendes, B., Hughes, B., Collins, K., & Gabbett, T. J. (2018). High-speed running and sprinting as an injury risk factor in soccer: Can well-developed physical qualities reduce the risk? Journal of science and medicine in sport, 21(3), 257-262.

7. Schuermans, J., Danneels, L., Van Tiggelen, D., Palmans, T., & Witvrouw, E. (2017). Proximal neuromuscular control protects against hamstring injuries in male soccer players: a prospective study with electromyography time-series analysis during maximal sprinting. The American journal of sports medicine, 45(6), 1315-1325.

8. Ishøi, L., Krommes, K., Husted, R. S., Juhl, C. B., & Thorborg, K. (2020). Diagnosis, prevention and treatment of common lower extremity muscle injuries in sport–grading the evidence: a statement paper commissioned by the Danish Society of Sports Physical Therapy (DSSF). British journal of sports medicine, 54(9), 528-537.

9. Longo, U. G., Loppini, M., Berton, A., Marinozzi, A., Maffulli, N., & Denaro, V. (2012). The FIFA 11+ program is effective in preventing injuries in elite male basketball players: a cluster randomized controlled trial. The American journal of sports medicine, 40(5), 996-1005.

10. Sugiura, Y., Sakuma, K., Sakuraba, K., & Sato, Y. (2017). Prevention of hamstring injuries in collegiate sprinters. Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 5(1), 2325967116681524.

11. Seagrave III, R. A., Perez, L., McQueeney, S., Toby, E. B., Key, V., & Nelson, J. D. (2014). Preventive effects of eccentric training on acute hamstring muscle injury in professional baseball. Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2(6), 2325967114535351.

12. Malliaropoulos, N., Bikos, G., Meke, M., Vasileios, K., Valle, X., Lohrer, H., … & Padhiar, N. (2018). Higher frequency of hamstring injuries in elite track and field athletes who had a previous injury to the ankle-a 17 years observational cohort study. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 11(1), 7.

Most of us who have been in the field of athletic preparation for a while are familiar with Vern Gambetta. For those who aren’t, Gambetta is a 40-plus year veteran in the athletic development profession. His experience has run the gamut in terms of levels (professional, Olympic, high school) and sports (baseball, soccer, swimming, track). Gambetta’s ability to keep things simple and help his athletes master the basics has made his insights and applications timeless.

One such application I’ve employed and adapted is the leg circuit that bears his name. He developed the Gambetta leg circuit in the mid-1980s as a tool to serve as a foundation for lower body training for all athletes, at all levels, at various points in their training. Leg circuits develop general strength and work capacity in the lower body for explosive, speed, and power athletes. These general qualities will form a foundation for more intense work in the future (i.e., absolute strength and plyometrics). As we’ll learn, the pace and progression of leg circuits (LCs) are key to developing local hypertrophy in the muscles, resiliency of the connective tissues, and efficiency of the vascular tissues.

According to Gambetta, the benefits of leg circuits go beyond horsepower and engine size; he has also employed LCs as return to play criteria in lower extremity injury rehabilitation. Share on X

According to Gambetta, the benefits of leg circuits go beyond horsepower and engine size; he has also employed LCs as return to play criteria in lower extremity injury rehabilitation, bridging the gap between physical therapy and athletic preparation. The goal for athletes is to complete five full leg circuits uninterrupted, with elite performers clocking in at just above five minutes. Although this is rare, we are looking at 250 reps in that amount of time.¹ From a practical standpoint, this makes complete sense, as the first load any athlete (or person, for that matter) should be able to handle is their own body weight in an athletic manner.

The Classic Progression and Execution

The Gambetta leg circuit consists of four exercises, performed in order:

1. Squat
2. Forward lunge
3. Dynamic step-up
4. Squat jump

Repetitions have three level distinctions—the mini, half, and full—that you can use as progressions and adapt to needs (think short-long spectrum here). The mini leg circuit consists of five reps in the squat, three reps per leg for the lunges and step-ups, then three squat jumps, and it serves as the entry point for leg circuits. The next level is the half LC, where repetitions increase to 10/5e/5e/5, respectively. The full leg circuit consists of 20 reps of the squat, then 10 reps each leg for lunges, the same for step-ups, and 10 squat jumps.

Gambetta views the full leg circuit as the standard and the pinnacle, if you will. For Gambetta, performance of the full LC for five consistent sets (no rest between sets) serves as the hallmark of an athlete’s general fitness and readiness to play, existing as a test and a goal.²

For Gambetta, performance of the full leg circuit for 5 consistent sets (no rest between sets) serves as the hallmark of an athlete’s general fitness and readiness to play. Share on X

Leg circuits progress via a systematic increase in volume and decrease in rest intervals. The first session consists of three sets of the circuit with 30 seconds of rest between exercises and one minute between completion of each circuit. Each subsequent session calls for adding one more set of work, culminating at five sets after three sessions. If athletes can complete the circuits with proper technique and make the rest intervals, then the next session will start again with three sets with the rest between exercise eliminated but preserved between circuits. The final progression would be three, four, and five circuits without rest between exercises and circuits.

The key to the effectiveness of the leg circuits goes beyond sets, reps, and the volume progression. Gambetta espouses that the rhythm, tempo, and speed of the repetitions are key to mimicking the eccentric loads seen in practice, play, and higher intensity preparation. In my understanding, the fast-down/fast-up pace (with the goal of one rep per second on squats and one rep per 1.5 seconds on lunges and low step-ups) accentuates the eccentric forces without having to resort to riskier tactics. This makes LCs ideal as a prerequisite for external loading and withstanding landing forces, cutting forces, and impact forces.²

Vern Gambetta warns that this fast-eccentric work may result in extreme soreness; although not the goal, soreness will give the athlete and coach feedback that the proper exercise tempo was executed.¹ I’ll add that coaches can use this to drive buy-in in this ever-growing age of those who equate the value of the work with how bad their body feels afterward. Many young athletes (especially endurance-based) are about “feeling it,” and I can say from experience that they surely will!

Even without the use of external load, intensity is raised by the consistent exposure to rep pace and the gradual accumulation of work density via the dwindling rest periods. In my experience, this is what makes the Gambetta leg circuits a tremendous tool to raise several critical general qualities at once without having to get too fancy.

The beauty of the leg circuits lies in the versatility of the concept. As much as the mini, to half, to full leg circuits are progressions, they can also flow the other way when employing more advanced means or when having to scale them back a bit during a peak or taper phase. We will also find that the ability to stretch, condense, and vary training cycles (based on these circuits) can help coaches scale their plans to fit training age, needs, and time of season.

LDISO Leg Circuit

One variation I discovered is marrying long-duration isometric holds into the circuit at the onset of a beginner’s program. Readers of this website should be familiar with the benefits of LDISOs, and I won’t go into all of them here, but I will add that their placement in this variation serves as a building block for brain and body. Physiologically, LDISOs are paramount for building the musculo-tendon, musculo-fascia, and neuromuscular structures. Targeted long duration isometrics re-educate the tissues to target optimal fascial lines to establish neural networks. The LDISO attacks the origin and insertion points in the extreme lengthened position. The thickening of these points increases the durability and elastic response.³

Psychologically, this increased exposure to time (in the “weakest” joint position) builds a tolerance for discomfort and “slows” things down enough for the athlete to garner familiarity with proper position and posture. In turn, coaches can teach in “live time,” cueing and correcting the athlete’s technique as well as encouraging their effort in the struggle to hold. As most of us intuitively know, tolerance to pain is as much mental as it is physical, and it is a bit of a lost skill in most of today’s athletes.

In the LDISO variation of the leg circuit, the squat, lunge, and jump squat with body weight begin with an isometric hold that precedes five repetitions (the lunges serve as two exercises to train each leg). The first session is comprised of 15-second holds, followed by five repetitions of each respective exercise. We add five seconds to each hold every session, culminating with 30-second holds. Volume is not waved over the four sessions, as we are in an introductory phase and will remain at three sets of each circuit per session.

I discovered the value of marrying LDISOs to the leg circuit while training an athlete via Zoom—the LDISOs allowed them to get a feel for the proper position via physiological signals. Share on X

Believe it or not, I discovered the value of marrying LDISOs to the leg circuit while training an athlete via Zoom this past spring. The lack of physical presence, as well as my normal equipment, called for some critical thinking skills to figure out a way to teach without being there. In my experience, the LDISOs allowed this athlete to get a feel for the proper position via physiological signals.

The Broken Leg Circuit: Put It on the Clock!

The next step in my progression resembles the order of the standard leg circuit, with a few new caveats. We keep the squat as the first exercise, followed by alternating leg forward lunges, then we introduce the dynamic low step-up, and finish with squat jumps. Accompanying the slight change in exercises is the introduction of the “broken” format, where each exercise is performed on a certain clock interval, as opposed to continuously. (I’m borrowing the term “broken” from the swim world, which denotes breaking up a specified distance with short periods of rest. It is used to train distances in more intense chunks usually above a race pace.)

The clock does a couple of things for us here:

1. Athletes can keep an eye on the clock to gauge rep pace. In the first phase, the fatigue from the ISO hold may inhibit the speed of the rep pace, which is okay in my book at that stage because our focus is technique and tolerance. Now, we can give them a goal of rep pace.
2. The clock keeps our rest periods honest. The preference here is an EMOM interval, where each exercise is done on subsequent minutes. If we keep the rep goal of one per second on squats and one per 1.5 seconds in lunges and step-ups, then we get a work ratio of 10-20 seconds for the half leg circuit and 20-30 seconds if we use the full leg circuit.

This format allows us to train the aerobic and lactic zones for a prolonged period, as the work-to-rest intervals lie in the 1:2 and 1:1 ratio for the half and full leg circuit variations.⁴

In broken leg circuits, we do not take an extended rest period; rather, we stay on the interval until the prescribed number of sets is complete. The micro progression (session-to-session) follows Gambetta’s volume prescription, adding a set of work each week. In session 1, the three circuits are done within a 12-minute time, then four circuits in 16 minutes, culminating with five circuits in 20 minutes in the third session (for the sake of milking the slow cooker, we apply a fourth session at week 1 volume).

The macro progression (every four sessions) follows the short-long spectrum, leading off with the half leg circuit for four sessions before applying the full leg circuit for the next four sessions. A cyclic progression will look like this:

• Sessions 1-4: Broken half leg circuit with body weight
• Sessions 5-8: Broken full leg circuit with body weight

From here, I’ve found two places we can go:

1. We can add 15-25% bodyweight load and repeat the format. Loading options include dumbbells, sandbags, or weight vests. I’ve found this helpful for athletes who need a bit more strength or need to preserve power.
2. We can condense the interval to bridge the gap to continuous leg circuit. I prefer the E45O45 (every 45 on the 45) as this seems to fit a 1:1/2 work-to-rest ratio that will allow athletes a lead-up to the pace of the unbroken circuit.

The amount of time you have with your athletes and the time of season will determine the frequency of the sessions. A compressed progression calls for biweekly leg circuit days, which will get you through each cycle (phase) in two weeks. If you decide to apply the broken EMOM, broken E45O45, to “unbroken” (short-long) progression, you will complete the three levels in six weeks as long as you adhere to the technical execution.

For athletes who have a short time to prepare for practice and play, this compressed model serves as a great general lead-up into competitive season. For the beginning athlete, the compressed model will quickly develop work capacity adaptations and faster learning via frequent practice.

Putting the leg circuits on the clock allows coaches to scale the stress based on needs while checking off many boxes on the GPP list in a fraction of the time. Share on X

Coaches can also stretch this on a weekly basis, doubling the time to complete each cycle. This situation would be ideal in longer preparation periods or an in-season model. Putting the leg circuits on the clock allows coaches to scale the stress based on needs while checking off many boxes on the GPP list in a fraction of the time.

The Rapid-Fire Leg Circuit

Another variation—based off of Gambetta’s mini leg circuit—that I’ve applied with power or explosive development in mind is what I call the “rapid-fire leg circuit.” Three derivatives of this variation that cover the force-velocity spectrum have evolved for us over the years and have served us best with athletes nearing peak competition or entering a camp. The force emphasis variation is hallmarked by heavier loads in the squat and lunge and intensive efforts for the jumps—this influences the exercise selection for appropriate loading. The idea here is to produce high outputs for repeated efforts along a spectrum of high-force muscle contractions.

The heavier loads in the squat and lunges potentiate the output of the jumps by priming local muscular activity as well as the CNS globally without a high level of fatigue.⁵ The versatility of this variant allows coaches to adjust exercise selection based on which end of the force-velocity spectrum they are working.

The force emphasis rapid-fire leg circuit is executed using concentric-based movements to emphasize “force-based” output. For the squat exercise, I prefer the bottom-up squat (squat from pins) with the barbell. I keep depth at half or quarter depth to further draw adaptations of higher transfer. Some coaches may argue that the experience and skill level of the athlete need to be high enough to handle a barbell, and I don’t disagree. Movement precision under load is a must so that athletes maintain technique and posture as fatigue mounts, especially in this format.

This where I believe the bottom-up squat can serve as a self-regulator of sorts. Each rep commences from the weakest position of leverage from a dead stop position. Not only does this enable maximal concentric output, but (as practical experience has shown me) it allows athletes to squat correctly without the fear of missing. In other words, if they miss the lift, it won’t budge; the goal is simple—“Push!” For those coaches who use percentages of 1RM, 70-80% for the squat works well.

The lunges call for the classical forward lunge technique:

• Project the hips forward with the back leg.
• Reverse your forward momentum with your front leg.
• Explode back to standing position.

If using a barbell, 50-60% (of squat max) for the lunges is more than enough. And again, we can add “transfer” here in the form of horizontal force by selecting cord lunges, per Dr. Yessis. In this case, you would use a cord that slows you down a bit, minimizing displacement of the body after the rep.

In keeping with our force priority, the dynamic step-ups and squat jumps can be done with external load in the form of a weight vest or sandbag for the step-ups and a kettlebell for the jumps at about 15-25% body weight. By nature, the dynamic step-ups begin with the jump leg in the position of weakest leverage, so we do not have to make any tweaks here. The preferred jump squat calls for the non-countermovement version where the kettlebell (or weight) will start from the floor. The athlete can jump onto a box of moderate height or keep it floor level. The Just Jump mat is a great tool to keep intent honest, as the visual result of their efforts will show them the story.

You can also adjust the format of this variation to fit preservation of higher quality of output or the ability to repeat it. Our rep template is based off of four squats, two lunges each leg, two dynamic step-ups each leg, and two squat jumps (14 reps total). If we train for increasing output, then we simply go through the circuit continuously and rest at least double the time it took to complete. If this is the case, then using the jump height to manage overall volume may be a wise application so as not to tip the CNS bucket too far over, especially during periods of quality retention or in-season. We typically cap the number of sets to five or cease sets if an athlete cannot maintain 90% of their best jump. The intent is to hit personal bests on a session-to-session basis while preserving that higher end quality.

For specific work capacity development, we repeat this sequence continuously three times and time the duration of the set. Rest runs about half of the running time before repeating. You can certainly track jump height here, but accepting a larger drop-off (80% of best) will help your athletes reach the volume necessary to develop the repeat quality.

In this variation we attempt to wave volume by adding a set of work each session. In week 1, the groundwork is laid with three rounds of the circuit done at a 1:1/2 work-to-rest ratio (126 total reps). The next session we aim for an extra round through as long as the athlete can maintain that 80% of jump height, and on week 3, we’ll attempt to culminate the cycle with five sets (168 and 210 reps, respectively). If we have more time, we’ll give a six-session limit here for athletes to earn the five sets or just simply see what we can do in three sessions. (The 80% marker is akin to the 20% bar speed drop-off that was found to better increase vertical jump height and overall growth of the type II explosive muscle fibers discovered by Dr. Mann.)

Video 1. Featured here is a lite version of the above, used with younger athletes who don’t have a large experience with higher force movements, but you can get the idea.

If we really want to prime the system for higher outputs with higher intensity via speed, then we can break this down a little further. In this Cal Dietz-inspired variation, we ratchet the exercise selection to the velocity end with loaded jump squats (at half or quarter depth), split jumps, dynamic step-ups (low box), and the countermovement jump. (For more qualified athletes, you can substitute the lightened split jump and the depth jump for the CMJ.)

The reps go down to a scheme of two, one each, one each, two, and repeat this sequence 3-5 times (24-40 reps), à la the potentiation clusters seen in the triphasic high-speed methods. The rest between rounds should be double the duration of the set or more, to allow for adequate rest so that outputs can increase each set or be preserved, at the very least. The high-quality emphasis dictates a volume limit, so we do not add a set per session but rather aim at setting bests in jump height (or at least preserve our day’s best).

Video 2. Creating higher intensity via speed in the “rapid-fire leg circuit.”

The genius of Gambetta’s leg circuits is that they allow for bilateral and unilateral lower body training across a variety of muscular contractions. Adding elements such as long-duration ISOs, interval based, and adjusting the exercise selection can give coaches viable options along the general-specific spectrum. The marriage with LDISOs adds benefits to developing the aerobic base, as well as technical learning.

The genius of Gambetta’s leg circuits is that they allow for bilateral and unilateral lower body training across a variety of muscular contractions. Share on X

Bridging this gap by putting the base movements “on the clock” gives athletes a progressive segue to the “right of passage” earned in the continuous circuits. The rapid-fire variations offer a more specific training option for explosive leg development that coaches can adjust along the force-velocity spectrum to meet needs.

Some of the greatest coaches in history have a simple catalog of “plays,” but myriad effective variations of them. For those with leg circuits in your catalog, I hope this writing adds variations to your creative arsenals.

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. Gambetta, V. “The Gambetta leg circuit.” HMMR Media. 12/18/10.

2. “Legs, legs, legs.” GAINcast Podcast #187. 4/27/20.

3. Fox, E.L. and Mathews, D.K. Interval Training: Conditioning for Sports and General Fitness. W.B. Saunders Co., 1974. pp 40.

4. Demayo, J. The Manual Vol. 3. Central Virginia Sport Performance, 2018. pp 138-139.

5. Schmarzo, M. and Van Dyke, M. Applied Principles of Optimal Power Development. E-book, 2018. pp 17.

A pervasive narrative runs through the discussion around training for the sport of surfing—circulated both by coaches of elite surfers and surf websites appealing to recreational surfers—which is to only use surfing to get better at surfing. This does not help surfers, as many surf sessions can in fact be unremarkable. Dictated by fickle swells, tides, and wind, the sport itself isn’t always the best stimulus for physical development.

Yoga and bodyweight-only training are other infatuations in the surf community, with many convinced that these methods alone can keep them aligned, believing you only carry your body weight when you surf, so that is how you must prepare. This camp seems to underestimate the sheer force and power of the ocean.

Finally, there are the Indo Board and balance ball fanatics, who are convinced that the sensorimotor demands of balancing on a plank or ball replicate an ocean because they share an uncanny visual resemblance.

My fellow surfers may be quick to label me as well when they know I work as an S&C coach for a rugby team: in the meathead camp? What you must understand is that I am not in denial about the potential benefit of the above elements for training in a surfer’s program. Instead, I am disillusioned by the narrative of being married to one approach at the expense of all others. Monogamy does not apply to training methods.

I am disillusioned by the narrative of being married to one approach at the expense of all others. Monogamy does not apply to training methods. Share on X

Additionally, I am curious and observant. As a coach, I am constantly challenged to find evidence-based ways of improving performance. As a surfer, I still see surfing’s resistance to effective preparation lingering at all levels of the sport, despite its inclusion in next year’s Olympic Games.

It may be that people in the sport are just trying to keep it soulful and carefree, while sticking their fingers up at the jocks (an integral part of its culture). I love it and salute it. As coaches, however, we need to show that we’re not here to wring the fun from the pursuit:

• If you find yourself getting better at something, does this give you a sense of fulfillment?
• If you love something and you’re forced out of it with an injury, do you feel less fulfilled?
• If you know you’re preparing effectively for something, do you not feel more confident in your abilities?

These key questions provide the catalyst for surfers to understand that training for their sport aims to provide more fun, for the competitive and recreational surfer alike. With this in mind, and with the hope of slowly chipping away at the current narrative, I’ll provide training tips for surf athletes from the evidence base. I believe much of the content I will cover in this article would also be applicable (with some tweaks) to other board sports (skateboarding, snowboarding, and paddleboarding, etc.). Today, we kick off with dryland strength and power training tips and what I see as six essential exercises.

Warning! Before delivering any of this content to a surfer, you may have to counsel them through their unease.

Luckily, I’ve created a quick cheat sheet of replies:

• “You won’t get big and bulky, unless your diet is out of control and you’re taking special ‘vitamins’.”
• “You won’t become as stiff as your board if you train through a full range of motion.”
• “World Surf League (WSL) surfers aren’t the only ones who are allowed to train for their sport.”
• “If there’s waves, get in the bloody surf.”

For Paddling

(Photo courtesy of Sebastian Potthoff.)

What’s Happening Here?

Believe it or not, 44-54% of the time in a surf session is spent paddling.¹ Paddling into the lineup. Paddling across to the peak. Sprint paddling into waves. Paddling happens a lot.

Faster. Move faster. C’mon, for #$@&% sake! These are the thoughts that rush forward when a big set rolls through and a surfer gets “caught inside” and is paddling for safety. And then, reaching the lineup after having had to bail their board as the wave dumped its payload on their head, there is relief mixed with annoyance that “just two strokes more and I would’ve made it over the back of that one.”

Faster paddling has been found to be a determining factor between different levels of surfers…thus, paddling is perhaps the most important quality to improve through training. Share on X

Faster paddling may not only spare the anguish of getting caught inside; it has been found that it is also a determining factor between different levels of surfers.² In WSL competitions, surfers with a higher sprint paddling speed achieved better competition results. Those surfers with a sprint paddle of <1.7 meters per second tended to be eliminated before round 5, compared to those who had a sprint paddle of >1.9 meters per second, who reached the quarters at least and could go on to win the final.²

Higher sprint paddling allows competitive surfers to paddle into steeper waves with a faster entry momentum into those waves, increasing the number of maneuvers and therefore enhancing fun and/or scoring potential.³ Thus, paddling is perhaps the most important quality to improve through training.

How Do We Improve It?

Paddling will increase paddling ability. But increasing strength will also massively improve this skill. In paddling, you anchor your arm in the water and “pull” and then “push” your body across the surface. There is no contest as to which are the best exercises for improving this action: pull-ups and dips are the most integral movements that mimic this movement pattern and activate the correct musculature.⁴

These two relatively simple exercises should of course be trained through a full and comfortable ROM. Surfers new to strength work may need assistance through the use of banded pull-ups from higher to lower elasticity. For those better versed in training, bodyweight reps and then additional plates added through the use of a weight belt should be the goal.

Standards of upper body strength that can be targeted are outlined below. Some of the world’s best male surfers can have a pull-up of 1.4 times their body weight. For an 80-kilogram surfer, that would mean 35 kilograms extra weight added for a total weight of 115 kilograms. This is not a huge pull-up relative to other sports, but highly sufficient for the demands of surfing. However, even a progression from doing three reps with a band to three reps at body weight should give appreciable improvements in paddling ability.

For Turns, Snaps, and Carves

(Photo courtesy of Sebastian Potthoff.)

What’s Happening Here?

Turns, snaps, carves, or cutbacks all look and feel best when there’s spray fired all over the lineup. Achieving maximum spray in these maneuvers requires adequate lower body strength and power to displace as much water as possible through the application of force through their legs and onto their board.⁵

If a surfer can apply more force, or apply it more quickly to exhibit this, competitive judges have the potential to score maneuvers more highly. For recreational surfers, those paddling back out into the lineup will be thinking Jesus’ juice is falling on them. They will not fathom that, in fact, it’s just them hitting the lip.

How Do We Improve It?

Talent, technique, and timing clearly have significant parts to play for flowing yet powerful turns, but a surfer having adequate levels of lower body strength will go a long way toward better displaying these skills. In these maneuvers, the surfer compresses and loads up their legs before extending their hips at just the right moment. The best exercises for improving these actions would be two bread-and-butter strength movements: barbell back squats and Romanian deadlifts (RDLs). They are often done, and rightfully so, because there are few better movements to load the ankles, knees, hips, and the powerful musculature of the quadriceps, hamstrings, and glutes.

Talent, technique, and timing clearly have significant parts to play for flowing yet powerful turns, but a surfer with adequate levels of lower body strength will better display these skills. Share on X

Like any athlete, but particularly surfers who may have never entered a gym, it is imperative that they master technique before piling on load in these two exercises. My cues for the squat: With a just-outside shoulder-width stance, sit down as far as is comfortable in between your hips. Think about pushing your knees out slightly as you go down to activate your glutes and push through your quads on the ascent.

For the RDL: Pick up a bar with a just-outside shoulder-width grip and pull the shoulder blades back and together as if you were trying to crack a nut between them. Unlock the knees and push your rear-end back as far as you can (like the Insta models do) while dragging the bar down the thighs to mid-shin before coming back up again. For both movements, keep a controlled tempo on the descent of about two seconds (loading up) and fire back up as fast as possible with control (extend) on the ascent, just like a turn.

Those new to strength training can perform a standard progression of goblet squats and dumbbell hinges before moving on to using the barbell. Lower body strength standards are outlined below.

For Aerials and Floaters

(Photo courtesy of Sebastian Potthoff.)

What’s Happening Here?

Airs and big floaters are obviously advanced moves incorporating a multitude of complex skills, but the evolution of the sport has entered the territory of skateboarding and snowboarding and is set to stay there. Shouldn’t every surfer prepare for the day that they begin to dabble in these dark arts? For the day that they get 0.1 seconds of air that does not include falling off the back of a wave?

Essentially, airs can be broken into three phases: takeoff, flight, and landing. The take-off and landing phases of airs and the landing phase of floaters are the ones we can most affect with physical training, as that is when the body meets the most impact.

How Do We Improve It?

This “impact” I am talking about is clear: stomping airs and floaters provide the greatest potential risk for injury of any maneuver⁶ (two-time world champion John John Florence’s ACL injury is just a recent example), particularly if surfers don’t possess adequate lower body strength and power. While landing one of these maneuvers, surfers commonly absorb forces of up to 4-6 times their own body weight through their ankles, knees, and hips.⁷ Having well-developed strength and power will also enable surfers to launch themselves higher off the lip of the wave, getting some of that sweet, sweet hang time.¹

You have to be strong and powerful to get a heavy bar off the floor quickly with good technique or to come up with a heavy weight on your back. Therefore, the squats and RDLs above will allow surfers to absorb this weight, just like air and floater landings. But to go one step further, we must also replicate the movement pattern of these complex movements and their landings on land to develop injury robustness through proper joint alignment. 

Video 1. Drop & Stick, Jump & Stick, and Rebound & Stick.

A box or step that is around knee height (~50 centimeters) is required. The progressions start with a basic drop and stick (D&S), replacing the drop with a jump (J&S) and then finally onto a rebound and stick (R&S). For all of these, “sticking” the landing in a surf stance/quarter squat position without excessive knee valgus is desired (there will be some knee valgus in the back leg, as this position is essential in the sport). The aim of the landings here should be to land softly, as if you didn’t want to wake up someone sleeping in the next room, which is especially hard after a chaotic rotation. This will teach absorbing the force of landings and better coordination of the body in space when in the ocean.

To help in applying that force off the lip in the take-off phase of airs and getting some tasty height, jump training replicates these movements and will be highly effective in improving them due to the development of vertical power through the lower body.

Video 2. CMJ, rotational CMJ, and loaded CMJ.

The key exercise here is progressing a basic countermovement jump (CMJ): In your squat stance, in one flowing movement, go down to a comfortable depth (~quarter squat depth) and jump as high as possible to the ceiling. No need to bring the knees up, but aim to get hips as high off the ground as possible. Land as described above. Progressions (below) aim to add complexity through surf-specific rotations before finally adding load in the barbell CMJ.

Strength and Power Work Can Be a Lucrative Performance Enhancer

(Photo courtesy of Sebastian Potthoff.)

Just like yoga, bodyweight, and balance board training, strength and power work is only one small element of the performance model to improve surfing performance. However, it is especially important to adopt due to the current narrative within surfing culture that steers most surfers hastily away from anything gym-based. The six exercises above—coupled with finishers of supplementary work for torso/core strength and power, ankle and hip mobility and rotator cuff robustness—will provide a great foundation for the training of surfers.

Considering surfers’ low training ages, increases in whole body strength & power through these generic exercises may be particularly beneficial for performance enhancement. Share on X

Furthermore, considering surfers’ low training ages, increases in whole body strength and power through these generic exercises may be particularly lucrative in terms of their potential for performance enhancement.

Join me soon for another part in this series, which will take a look at energy system development for surfing.

All photos courtesy of Sebastian Potthoff, Instagram: @saltwatershots

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. Tran, T.T., Lundgren, L., Second, J.L., et al. “Comparison of Physical Capacities Between Non-Selected and Selected Elite Male Competitive Surfers for the National Junior Team.” International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance. 2014.

2. Sheppard, J. “Masters & servants: How the preparation framework serves the performance model.” UKSCA Conference Presentation. 2017.

3. Farley, O., Harris, N.K., and Kilding, A. “Physiological Demands of Competitive Surfing.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2011;

4. Coyne, J., Tran, T.T., Secomb, J.L., et al. “Maximal Strength Training Improves Surfboard Sprint & Endurance Paddling Performance in Competitive & Recreational Surfers.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016.

5. Secomb, J.L., Farley, O.R.L., Lundgren, L.E., et al. “Associations between the Performance of Scoring Manoeuvres and Lower-Body Strength and Power in Elite Surfers.” International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2015.

6. McArthur, K., Jorgensen, D., Climstein, M., and Furness, J. “Epidemiology of Acute Injuries in Surfing: Type, Location, Mechanism, Severity, and Incidence: A Systematic Review.” Sports (Basel). 2020;8(2):25.

7. Lundgren L.E., Tran, T.T., Nimphius, S., et al. “Comparison of impact forces, accelerations and ankle range of motion in surfing-related landing tasks.” Journal of Sports Sciences. 2016;34(11):1051-1057.

Is swinging hundreds of times to the nondominant side worth the time, effort, and awkwardness for golfers? There are certainly many people in the industry who believe so. Should we take their word for it?

Many say it prevents injury and “balances” the golfer side to side—they’ve “seen it work.” They say the chances of getting hurt swinging in the opposite direction are less than if you don’t do it. How do they know that?

Others say it increases motor unit recruitment and “strengthens” the golfer’s ability to decelerate the golf club. Does it increase their ability to produce force in the true sense of strength? Or is it more of a central nervous system effect?

More say that you can only swing as fast as you can decelerate and that training nondominant-side swings creates faster permanence. Who tested this to figure it out? Where is the data? How do they know that a causational relationship exists between deceleration and top-end swing speed and it is not just a collateral effect? Do they have objective data on it, or is it just a theory that can be made to sound reasonable?

Alternatively, naysayers bring up that you don’t train sprinters to be world champions by having them run backward or counterclockwise on the track to “balance” them out. Some professionals who have worked with the best in the world have even said that asymmetrical muscle imbalances are beneficial to performance—if they were to fix it, the runners would no longer be the fastest in the world.

So why would we want to “fix” asymmetry in golf but not in other sports? Is it really a problem, or is it actually a beneficial performance adaption?

Then there are the baseball and tennis arguments for why we don’t have pitchers throw as hard as they can with their nondominant arm. Do the top tennis players in the world practice serving as hard as they can on their opposite side to prevent injury and maximize their speed? If they do, and their speeds increase, how do they know it was solely because of the opposite side training and not because of other things they did?

The list goes on…

I was part of a very long Twitter thread on this topic recently, and when it came to asking either side of the coin to produce objective information, the proverbial Twitter crickets killed the conversation. Really smart people become entrenched on different sides of debates like this based on theory and opinion…yet few actually have the grit, desire, and/or resources to go research and actually test it themselves to see. Hence, the Twitter crickets and trolls reign supreme.

What was even more apparent, and frustrating, was the clear lack of understanding of the actual point of opposite side training. What physiological systems or benefits are actually being trained? There were more opinions than choices on a Cookout Shake menu.

What’s even more apparent and frustrating is the clear lack of understanding of the actual point of opposite side training. What physiological systems or benefits are actually being trained? Share on X

I’ve decided to see if I can answer these questions instead of getting into endless debates and conversations on theory and case data. Hopefully, this article will help move the conversation forward. Nothing frustrates me more in a conversation than a rebuttal of “We don’t have data, but we don’t make this up. We’ve worked with hundreds/thousands of people, so we know it works, and you should just trust us.”

Let’s stop puffing chests and hiding insecurities. Instead, let’s start filling data sheets with actual objectively collected data. I find that to be so much more productive.

So, enjoy the ride as I work through the exercise of presenting each of the opinions/thought processes one by one and dissecting them to see if we can bring some clarity to the discussion, or at least an intelligent starting point…

Theory 1: Opposite Side Swings Reduce Injuries in Golfers

Let’s start with what we know.

We know that lead side extremity and low back injuries are the most common injuries that we see in golf, which is rampant with overuse injuries. This is very clear in the literature. Further, it has been documented in a number of studies that lead side hip internal rotation deficit is highly correlated to low back injury.

What we further know from all the research we have done at Par4Success (with more than 1,300 golfers in our database longitudinally) is that if the four main rotational centers don’t have enough motion (hip internal rotation, shoulder external rotation, thoracic spine rotation, and neck rotation), there is an increased frequency of injury and a decreased swing speed. When these rotary centers improve, pain decreases and speeds increase.

We also have seen a very alarming trend with injuries when general power percentiles for age/sex compared to swing speed percentiles for age/sex are low. If all the rotational centers are cleared, but there exists a greater than 15 percentile point deficit of general power numbers (shot put, vertical peak power, and seated chest pass) relative to the golfer’s swing speed percentile, they are more likely to be injured.

We are also seeing early trends of elite level golfers being injured or having injury issues if they are in the top 10-15% of swing speed for their age groups but don’t meet certain strength requirements, such as deadlift loads or other strength metrics in squat and bench press.

So, there are definitely clear ways identified in research, objectively, to decrease the likelihood of repetitive overuse injuries by getting golfers stronger, getting them more mobile in the rotary centers (unless already hypermobile, then doubling down on strength), and making sure their technical abilities and equipment don’t outpace their general power numbers for club speed.

Other Studies, and a Resulting Question

There have also been a number of studies done to look at asymmetrical muscle mass, rotational power, and rotational endurance abilities in golfers compared to the normal population (non-golfers). In all of these studies there was a significant increase to the dominant side in mass, power, and endurance (generally speaking) among the golfers compared to the non-golfers, which shouldn’t be surprising. There also was no negative ability to produce power or endurance on the nondominant side (aka the side not used “concentrically” during the swing) during the testing compared to the general population.

Interestingly, in none of these studies did any researcher raise a concern over injury due to the imbalance, but instead stated the imbalances may be an adaptation that is advantageous for performance.

This brings up an interesting question.

If golfers swing to their nondominant side as often as non-golfers (aka never), why would we want to swing to the nondominant side in golfers but not in non-golfers? Clinicians certainly aren’t recommending to non-golfers that they swing a club fast as a way to prevent injury, so why do we do it to golfers?

Clinicians certainly aren’t recommending to non-golfers that they swing a club fast as a way to prevent injury, so why do we do it to golfers? Share on X

Is perhaps the increased muscle mass and ability to generate power unilaterally protective in nature and obviously advantageous for performance? The natural rebuttal is, of course, “Well, non-golfers don’t swing to the dominant side thousands of times, Chris. That’s why they don’t have imbalance issues and therefore don’t need to balance themselves by swinging to the nondominant side.”

You would be right in that non-golfers don’t have an imbalance from swinging in one direction all the time. But so what? How do we know asymmetrical mass and power production to the dominant side is a problem? How do we know that fixing it (if that is even possible) will stop someone from being injured? I have struggled to find anything that suggests the power, force, and muscle differences side to side are injury-causing if all rotary centers are full, and power and strength metrics are where they should be.

A question to think about: What if we tell a non-golfer to go swing the golf club 1,000 times and then tell a golfer who has the asymmetrical adaptions to do the same? Who would you put your money on getting hurt first? I would bet the house on the non-golfer who is “balanced” being injured way sooner.

Assumption Fun

Let’s assume that asymmetrical imbalance is a problem for golfers that increases risk of injury because the golfer will have trouble “decelerating.” Let’s further assume that slowing down or “deceleration” is an active eccentric musculoskeletal event. “Strengthening” concentrically with nondominant swings would be a pretty inefficient way to remedy this assumption for a number of reasons, both physiologically and ideologically, but we’ll address those issues later.

Alternatively, perhaps slowing down the swing to the dominant side is more of a stretch-shortening cycle event without a strong contraction back to the nondominant side, sort of like a rubber band just absorbing the force and decelerating the body. Is this more of a central nervous system and/or tendinous event?

If this is the case, should we look at training for tendon pliability and specific plyometrics to better absorb these forces? Opposite side training certainly wouldn’t accomplish this in its current commonly used form, unfortunately. Currently, golfers swing as hard as they can to one side or the other individually, failing to incorporate a plyometric event at the end of the swing, and instead just stopping after each rep.

To make the movement plyometric, a maximal effort nondominant-side swing would have to take place immediately following a completed maximal dominant-side swing. This would require full absorption of the energy eccentrically in the dominant direction, storage of it isometrically, and transfer into the nondominant side concentrically to maximize usage of the stretch-shortening cycle. Basically, a golf-specific swing plyometric exercise.

Video 1. Golf training use to be lost in sport-specific exercise, but now it’s making sure it’s appropriate for the sport and athlete. Focus on a combination of transfer and complimenting overuse patterns with more general loading.

Further thought might lead to training the tendons and tissue plyometrically in the lower half of the body, as well as via exercises like 180-degree rotational jumps or depth drop jumps into a 90-degree box jump, etc. These would all be much better and more efficient avenues for lower body tissue and nervous system loading.

Additionally, it would allow the golfer to practice the kinetic sequencing that occurs during the golf swing in an overloaded environment. Because the amount of force that needs to be absorbed in all of these examples would be greater than that in a nondominant-side swing, the nondominant-side swing seems to lose its appeal quickly as a way to reduce injury.

Theory 2: Opposite Swings Help to Balance the Golfer on Their Off Side

I don’t think I need to spend much time on this theory after the above section. Mass will be built in response to the repetitive overload that you apply to the tissue. A competitive golfer will swing to their dominant side at least 1,000 swings per week, but more likely close in on that per day.

If we think solely about the time it would take to have a golfer swing that many times to the nondominant side to “balance” them out from a volume perspective, it borders on ludicrous. Would you ever tell a golfer that instead of working on their putting or letting their body recover—or in a junior golfer’s case, to go be a kid—that they should spend hours swinging to the opposite side to achieve true balance via an equal number of reps? Common sense would reign supreme here, I hope.

So, the next thought is how we could achieve this result in a more time-efficient way…assuming it is even an important element.

I think it is safe to say there are much bigger (and researched) fish to fry when it comes to minimizing injury risk in golfers than swinging to the nondominant side. Share on X

At this point in the discussion, we don’t know if opposite side swings are important for performance. We also technically don’t know at this point if doing nondominant swings decreases injury risk. However, with the research and data that we do have, I think it is safe to say there are much bigger (and researched) fish to fry when it comes to minimizing injury risk in golfers than swinging to the nondominant side.

Theory 3: Being Balanced Actually Reduces Injury Risk

Again, this is a tough nut to crack, and there is not a lot of clarity here. There certainly are a lot of studies in baseball, tennis, volleyball, and other overhead sports that have tried to answer these questions. While asymmetrical shoulder blades or muscle imbalances from dominant to nondominant sides have been tough to tie to injury, there is definitely a strong suggestion that if the eccentric abilities of the shoulder rotators are not able to produce equal or more force than their concentric counterparts, injury could be more likely.

If we take this and make a leap (disclaimer, this is a leap, so feel free to tear it apart), then we could theorize that the golfer’s eccentric force creation ability to their lead side should be equal to or greater than their concentric ability to that same side. Again, this is a leap and discusses force creation, aka strength.

If we accept this as true, then opposite side swings do nothing to help the golfer in this instance. They concentrically train the tissues that need to work eccentrically during the dominant side follow-through—not helpful for sport-specific need—and they would eccentrically train the tissues that need to move concentrically during the dominant-side swing. It’s cool, but not physiologically helpful in this context.

Video 2. This is what a dominant-side swing looks like for a right-handed player. Conversely, this would be a nondominant-side swing for a left-handed player.

What would be more helpful in this context is eccentric overload in rotational patterns with tools such as flywheels, which can provide eccentric overload to the tissues in the dominant direction. When training this specifically in a six-week randomized trial at Par4Success, we saw a 150% swing speed gain compared to the normal average for 12 weeks for an adult golfer. While this doesn’t speak to injury prevention, it certainly points to the value of improving eccentric force creation to the dominant side for performance.

The performance gains, when put together with the leap to needing to make sure eccentric strength rotationally to the dominant side is as strong or stronger than the concentric side, would make a case for potential value on the injury prevention side.

Theory 4: Nondominant-Side Swings Improve the Strength of the Opposite Muscles to Decrease Imbalance

Ok, now it’s later in the article, and we’re going to dive into this theory as mentioned in the injury prevention section. The short answer is that physiologically, this is not one of the stronger thoughts.

When swinging a golf club that weighs around 300 grams at most, you obviously won’t overload the tissues to a point where a strength response will happen. To be more specific, you won’t be able to train an individual’s muscles to put out more force via mechanical overload at the tissue level. The club is way too light, and most of the angular velocity will be created in the first 25% of the movement anyway, with the rest being momentum—there’s not much more to say there.

If you look at it more from a central nervous system perspective, however, then we get into the coordination debate and the idea of neurological carryover. I’m sure you’ve heard the explanation that if you can get better on your off side, the brain doesn’t know left from right, and it will carry over to the opposite side. Sounds good, right? But, so did “If you can do it on a Bosu ball, imagine how much better and powerful you will be when you are back playing your sport on the ground.” Oops…

A lot of this comes from rehabilitation work and neuro rehabilitation. In my time in the acute rehab setting, I used this carryover or overflow theory quite often in stroke patients, with great success. If a client was working on left leg knee extension in sitting (a long arc quad), and they couldn’t move the leg, you would have them go ahead and do 20 or so on the right leg, and magically, the left leg would move. (Disclaimer: Watch how you are sitting if testing this with a patient and do not position the affected leg between your legs. I was kicked out of a few chairs when the affected leg suddenly “sprang to life” and actually extended.)

At Par4Success, we have been testing the opposite side shot put for many years on thousands of golfers and operating under the assumption that increasing nondominant power numbers made sense and translated to performance. The raw correlations were above 0.8, so all is good, right?

Well, as we have gotten more data and started to be able to look more into causation, what variables actually need to change to cause performance change (swing speed), and what variables just happen to change, the opposite side rotational power theory appears to be losing steam. We see it not being a factor that directly changes club speed unless another variable improves as well. There are other factors that, if they solely change, club speed does too. Opposite side rotational power appears to be left behind a bit as we gain more understanding and data.

Without giving away the house, there is a definite need for more study here, and we are working on it.

To wrap up this section, one question is does nondominant side training have to be golf-specific? What about general nondominant work like med balls thrown on the opposite side? Would those work?

A thought… We know, from the research, that jumping three times before you swing will increase your club speed by 2-3 mph immediately. Is swinging a club in the nondominant direction just a general nervous system stimulus that produces increased club speed, much like performing some countermovement jumps on the tee before you swing will do?

While the answers to these questions are certainly left open to opinion and need to be looked into more, one thing has become clear through this line of thinking: Nondominant-side swings will not increase a golfer’s strength in any meaningful fashion or bring muscular balance to their bodies.

Theory 5: You Increase Motor Unit Recruitment by Swinging to the Opposite Side and Make It More Permanent

There are three ways to elicit maximal motor unit recruitment:

1. Max Intent Effort – above 60% (relative to your max; the lighter the load, the more you have to make up for it with your speed).
2. E-Stim
3. Fast Movement (plyometrics) – with a focus on decreased amortization phase to maximize power outputs via maximal magnitude, maximal rate, and shortest duration.

When looking at these three, obviously #1 and #2 are out when it comes to nondominant swings. The load is not nearly enough, unless you are my 1-year-old son, and e-stim on your body while swinging is just not practical but would be fun to watch.

That leaves us with #3.

The more specific the movement is to the activity that is going to be completed, the better. Some considerations to think about for specificity are the motion itself, the angular velocities at play, the loads, and the metabolic demands.

When you consider these, the actual max effort swing starts to make some sense, in the dominant direction. But only with an immediate change to the nondominant-side swing as equally explosive to take advantage of the stretch-shortening cycle.

This is an instance where you could also start with a nondominant swing, immediately transitioning into a dominant-side swing, but that is less specific and therefore would fall lower on the priority list. You obviously could argue global training effect here, but again, it is less specific and therefore would be lower on my list if I have to pick for the sake of efficiency and minimal effective dosage.

The other consideration is metabolic. After 15 seconds, your chances of maximal motor unit recruitment are a thing of the past. You will need to let your body recover. Generally speaking, at least a 1:5 work-to-rest ratio…at the VERY least.

Much like with the earlier discussion of trying to balance out a golfer by matching the same number of nondominant swings to dominant ones, we find ourselves at the mercy of time. If you have your athlete do opposite side swings with appropriate rest intervals, how much time are you willing to allocate to this training as opposed to other critically important areas? To do this well, at most, the athlete could get 4-5 swings in a 15-second time period. Assuming you do the minimum 75 seconds of rest, that is 90 seconds per set. Doing 10 sets would take you close to 15 minutes, at a minimum—for optimal exertion, effort, and results, you are more likely closer to double that time…and that is just to one side.

How much will this move the needle compared to other options out there? That is an incredibly important question to answer.

The last part of this theory about permanence has always been interesting to me. So much so that it has been a point of focus to understand as we have trained and collected data on the thousands of golfers here at Par4Success. In terms of what “permanence” means, no one ever really defines it, and honestly, I don’t think any training makes anything permanent. That would imply that if I reach a certain club speed, strength, and power output level, I can stop all I’m doing and maintain that speed, strength, and power.

Honestly, I don’t think any training makes anything permanent. Share on X

That would be nice, wouldn’t it?

The facts, however, are these…

• If a golfer stops working out, their club speed drops.
• If a golfer travels a lot or has lots of stress (typically during their season), their club speed drops.
• If a golfer stops working out but continues just doing nondominant-side swings, their speeds drop.
• If a golfer continues to work out during the season, maintaining their power outputs high with low volume, and has a lot of travel and stress, their club speed will drop…but their strength numbers often will still go up (or at least maintain), leading to a quick recovery of speed once the central nervous system recovers, and there is an actual long-term net gain that occurs year over year.
• If a golfer continues to work out during the season and maintain their power outputs high with low volume, continues with nondominant swings, and has a ton of travel and stress, their club speed will drop…but their strength numbers often will still go up (or at least maintain), leading to a quick recovery of speed once the central nervous system recovers, and there is an actual long-term net gain that occurs.

There has been no difference in speed maintenance or gains with or without nondominant swings that we have seen in this light. The biggest predictor of “permanent” gains or speeds that continually go up year after year is continued improvements in strength and power metrics with maintained rotational mobility, not how many nondominant swings they do.

**Theory 6: You Can Only Swing as Fast as You Can Decelerate, and Nondominant Swings Improve How Well You Can Decelerate

This one has always perplexed me and made me think.

Effectively, what we are saying here is that your body has a protective mechanism on it, “a governor,” that will preemptively restrict you from swinging faster than it feels you can control. I think of Golgi tendon organs and not letting my tendons tear when I hear this. It makes sense, and I’m very thankful to Mother Nature for those. As many of you know, the idea is that with training, you can move the “governor” to kick in at higher speeds and/or loads, pushing your “red line” higher.

My first issue with this theory is that I know my athletes can swing faster than they can control (i.e., they can swing faster than they can under control and lose their balance). They definitely have one peak playing speed that they can control, but they can swing at least 5-10 mph faster if they are not trying to hit a ball and put in play.

So physiologically, my next logical question is what is the best way to train so that I can alter my governor’s “fall-over speed” so it becomes higher, thereby increasing my “playing speed”? How also can I close the gap between my “fall-over speed” and my “playing speed”?

If we think about it from a force production standpoint, we can handle more load and tissue stress eccentrically than we can concentrically. If eccentric strength is what we need to improve to decelerate better, then it would be common sense to train eccentric-specific overload.

I think we should define that, however, as it does not mean the athlete using a cable machine or a strap wrapped around them and repping out rotational training. Overload means you have to eccentrically control more weight than you can move concentrically. One way would be by having a coach help the athlete get to the end of the concentric part of the rep (using a load they could not otherwise move), and then the athlete has to control the eccentric portion of the rotation on their own before the coach helps them again (i.e., on a cable machine).

Another option would be a flywheel and having someone help the athlete pull the wheel faster/harder than the athlete could concentrically themselves. This leaves them to have to decelerate and change the direction of the movement back to the starting position. If you are not using flywheel with this intent, it is not truly eccentric overload training, it is just another form of variable resistance training.

So, I now know how to increase my eccentric force outputs. The next question is, how do I improve my nervous system’s ability to not give out?

This is the other argument we hear, that opposite side swings increase motor unit activation. What is the peak way to get motor unit activation? There are three simple answers: load, intent, and speed.

Simply put, if I want to train to swing faster than my current “playing, not fall-over, speed.” Swinging a driver or a slightly lighter club faster in the dominant direction is all I would need to do, while maintaining maximal effort above and beyond what I can generate when playing and paying attention to appropriate recovery intervals. That will be an “overload” for the CNS to have to control.

Swinging faster to the dominant side and having to change direction quickly would be best, not concentric contraction to the opposite direction (traditional nondominant-side swings). Share on X

If I want to increase my “fall-over speed” ability to generate force, I have to increase my force output via strength training and/or plyometric-type drills to optimize my stretch-shortening cycle efficiencies with specific plyometric activities. Therefore, swinging faster to the dominant side and having to change direction quickly would be best, not concentric contraction to the opposite direction (traditional nondominant-side swings).

Video 3. This is how traditional nondominant swings looks for a right-handed player. Conversely, this is what a dominant-side swing looks like for a left-handed player.

Theory 7: Nondominant Swings Improve Kinematic Sequencing and, Ultimately, Speed

Now this is one that makes the most sense to me thus far.

When we start talking about kinematic efficiency, which definitely has a positive impact on club speed, opposite side swings can help with coordination, deceleration, and sequencing per some companies in the field.

I have yet to see overly convincing data on this, but at the surface, we can rationalize the potential benefit here based on the couple of case studies that have been presented.

When Par4Success did our studies looking at kinematic sequencing with lighter and heavier sticks than a driver, there were definite increases in hand and upper body speed, as well as altered kinematics with lighter sticks and increased x factor or lower body separation with the heavier sticks. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not.

These changes in kinematic sequencing based on the implement used pique my curiosity on the potential benefits of nondominant-side swing training when it comes to kinematic efficiency.

It will be interesting to see what actual data is produced.

Theory 8: Opposite Side Swings Improve Ground Force Production

This final one is definitely one we will test here at Par4Success when our GASP dual force plates arrive in a few weeks. The theoretical claims made that people can increase their ground force production with different drills and changes of directions definitely make sense.

Focusing on specific force vectors and improving the timing of the production of those forces obviously can be advantageous to increasing swing speed. It will be interesting to see what nondominant-side swings will show on this frontier, however.

My hypothesis is that, due to lower coordination and overall lower ability to produce force in the opposite direction, the results will kinetically be less than exciting, with other strategies proving to be more beneficial and effective. We know that improved ground forces positively impact club speed, and I am hedging my bets that opposite side swings will not be the most effective way to do that.

We know that improved ground forces positively impact club speed, and I am hedging my bets that opposite side swings will not be the most effective way to do that. Share on X

Maybe there will be other benefits to kinetic sequencing and transfer, but we will have to see!

A Repudiation of Benefits

As I have gone through each of the above points, the benefits of nondominant swings from a physiological perspective appear to be minimal and, in some cases, not viable.

The benefits to reduce injury appear to be minimal. Even if there are some benefits, there are far more effective and impactful areas to focus on. Rotary center mobility, power percentile relative to swing speed percentile ratios, and general strength to bodyweight relativity numbers in the squat, deadlift, and bench press are all much higher on the list and proven.

The benefits of “balancing” a golfer out by doing nondominant swings to reduce injury are questionable at best, and ultimately become irrelevant when you consider how much volume they would have to complete to be meaningful.

The plyometric benefits from a stretch-shortening cycle training perspective, if doing immediate maximal opposite direction “rebound” swings, are present with dominant swings specifically, but with nondominant swings only possibly globally.

The benefits of nondominant swings from a coordination standpoint to produce more force and have causational relationships to club speed gains appear to be more limited than initially thought based on early causational change data.

The benefits of nondominant swings to train deceleration to improve eventual top-end speed seem to be overstated, particularly since swinging to the nondominant side would be training the “decelerators” concentrically versus how they are used—eccentrically (which requires more force output than concentrically). Concentric contraction generally leads to a lower motor unit recruitment potential and is a complete training of the wrong specific swing direction.

Simply swinging a driver or a slightly lighter club (6-10%) faster than the golfer can do while hitting the ball would seem to produce enough of the “overload” stimulus needed to train higher level deceleration in the dominant direction, which they will actually use in sport and translates to performance. This would be the most specific form of training with a higher level of demand in deceleration.

The possible benefits of kinematic sequence improvements of a golfer’s swing make sense, and the few cases studies that have been presented look promising. However, they are case studies, so I am waiting for the additional data promised by some of those in the industry before making any calls on this one.

The kinetic benefits of nondominant swings remain to be seen, but I am not optimistic for them as compared to other training implements and strategies that for sure will make big changes in golf performance.

I am struggling to find where nondominant swings make sense from an injury prevention or performance perspective other than potential kinematic changes. Share on X

I guess as I read back through this, I am struggling to find where nondominant swings make sense from an injury prevention or performance perspective other than potential kinematic changes. I am intrigued by the idea of plyometric swing-specific training and the possible benefits to improve stretch-shortening cycle efficiency and potentially translate to performance and injury prevention.

I am sure there will be many who disagree with this article and want to have further discussion, and that is what I hope for! You can reach me @par4success on Twitter, or you can connect with us to further the discussion at www.par4success.com.

Let’s continue to move this conversation and our field forward while starting to cut the menu of theories down and replacing it with a database of objective facts that give golfers and coaches a clear path to longevity, speed, and performance.

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

The best products are the ones that you use daily and experience that A-ha! moment with, where you think: “Wow, I can’t believe I didn’t invent this. This is such a great idea.” Inventions provide solutions to common problems or upgrade solutions currently in place. Whether it be in the weight room or in day-to-day life, the products we use the most are the ones that help us more efficiently accomplish the task at hand.

In the weight room, our main products are barbells, dumbbells, weight plates, and benches. With those four things, you can honestly run a high-performance program. Would it be ideal? Probably not. But would it be enough? Definitely.

While there’s nothing wrong with the basic tools, we live in an era of innovation and not considering new solutions would be flat out irresponsible. As a coach, for me to not consider utilizing new, advanced equipment such as specialty bars would be like using Alexander Graham Bell’s original 1876 telephone design instead of at least checking out the new iPhone.

For me, to not consider utilizing new, advanced equipment such as specialty bars would be like using Bell’s original 1876 telephone design instead of at least checking out the new iPhone. Share on X

Specialty bars are exactly what they sound like. Special. They provide a specialty. They aren’t meant to replace all of our basics, but rather to enhance the adaptations we may be looking for when using them.

Whether it’s tall athletes deadlifting with a trap bar for better biomechanics, coaches utilizing a safety squat bar to allow for hand-assisted lifts, or athletes following a return-to-play protocol by lifting with an Earthquake bar, specialty bars can help us fill voids that we may not be able to fill with our standard equipment.

This article will highlight five of my favorite specialty bars, which I can confidently say are well worth the investment for you as a coach and for your athletes.

1. Earthquake Bar

The Earthquake bar by BandBell is a bar that I never knew I needed until I got my hands on one. I dismissed this bar for years, thinking it was a circus trick for Instagram likes and follows. Boy, was I wrong.

Shame on me for not doing my due diligence and research, because I probably could have helped a lot more athletes by implementing this in our programming earlier. BandBell was started by Jim Seitzer (a founding member of Westside Barbell), and his goal was to help find ways to train big movements without pain.

What started as a broomstick with mini bands and kettlebells attached to it has now turned into several different specialty bars, my favorite being the Earthquake bar.

At just about 6.5 pounds in weight and 1.5 inches in diameter, this bar is capable of handling 300 pounds of external load. Unlike a normal bar, the weight is not loaded directly onto the sleeve but rather hung from bands at the ends of the bar. This setup is what creates the unique benefits of O.K.E.

Oscillating Kinetic Energy

O.K.E., or oscillating kinetic energy if you want to sound super smart, is not a new concept but one that has been truly mastered by the use of this specialty bar. Using O.K.E. is great for both rehab and training goals because the stimulus comes from the oscillations, pulses, and perturbations that create varied levels of multiplanar instability. At different loads and kinetic energy levels, we can alter these exercises based on the desired adaptation.

For example, if you want an athlete to really wake up their central nervous system and tap into all those stabilizing muscles, it would be wise to use a setup with tons of kinetic energy. By hanging several lightweight kettlebells from the bar via bands, you can create the instability you’re looking for. I’ve had a lot of success introducing this early into programming when athletes return from an upper body injury or have high pain levels with traditional upper body lifts.

On the other hand, if an athlete is aiming for a good pump, you can hang heavier weight plates from the bar and even decrease the amount of band slack to make it more stable. Now you can move some pretty good weight with low levels of O.K.E. and work more of the prime movers of the lift without as much stress on the joint. This setup is really good for hypertrophy work on seasoned athletes who may want to avoid any undue joint stress or discomfort.

There are so many variables and customizations you can make with this bar. It’s much more than creating the chaos training effect. You can really fit lifts to each athlete’s needs in a truly beneficial and safe way.

How We Use It

While there are several ways to use this bar in a clinical setting, that’s not the field I’m in. If I were a physical therapist, this would be one of my go-to tools for rehabbing shoulders, elbows, hips, knees, and ankles. Instead, on the performance side of the business, I really love using the bar as a dynamic coordination tool. We’ll often operate in that medium kinetic energy range to get a little bit of the benefits from each end of the spectrum.

On the performance side of the business, I really love using the Earthquake bar as a dynamic coordination tool, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

The Earthquake bench press is great for athletes looking to find ways to press without pain, due to the lower overall load being used and the bar’s slightly thicker handle, but it’s also really helpful as a recovery and autoregulation tool.

On days when we might have some sort of bench press variation programmed, but the athlete comes in with a really low level of readiness, we can easily swap that out for the Earthquake bar. Maybe they’re sick, maybe they’re tired from practice/games, maybe they’re hurt, maybe their significant other dumped them, maybe they slept poorly. Those things can affect an athlete’s mental state, physical state, and overall ability to perform. Sometimes coaches have to recognize that and make the proper adjustments.

The benefits of this programming menu are twofold. As coaches, we’re able to alter an athlete’s workout to fit their level of readiness, which can help them ultimately reduce the risk of weight room injuries or the waste of having a lousy session that doesn’t benefit them. Secondly, we can possibly boost their morale with the introduction of something a little bit more unique and stimulating.

By giving the athlete something they might find fun and enjoyable, there is potential that their previously poor mental state and readiness can improve a bit mid-session, and they can finish off on a strong note with some normally programmed work.

Another really valuable exercise we’ve implemented into our speed development programming is the Earthquake split squat. We typically will use this on days when athletes are doing resisted sprints as a way to prime the nervous system without taxing it. The lift itself really challenges the lower extremity stability, which also translates over to their sprint work—especially if they’re working against any type of resistance.

When we first started using the 1080 Sprint, we noticed a lot of athletes would try to drive so hard and stay so low that they would sometimes stumble forward in acceleration. Anecdotally, we believe that the use of the Earthquake split squat before resisted sprints has helped athletes lock into their positions because of their increased single leg stability.

Anecdotally, we think using the Earthquake split squat before resisted sprints has helped athletes lock into their positions due to their increased single leg stability, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

At around $250, the Earthquake bar is a bargain. As I said, it’s more than just hanging bands from a bar for Instagram likes. There is so much you can accomplish with this bar, whether it’s sports performance, physique competition, or powerlifting, the bar is worth its weight in gold. If you are in a setting where you work with a lot of professional athletes or in small group or personal sessions, this would probably suit you very well.

2. Trap Bar

The trap bar, sometimes referred to as a hex bar, is a very common specialty bar that you may already have a lot of experience with—of the five bars listed in this article, the trap bar is probably the most widely used and well-known. And with prices starting around $150, it’s a low-cost, no-brainer investment.

This is a versatile bar, especially for deadlift, loaded jump, and loaded carry variations. You can get wildly creative with this bar, but that’s not really my thing. I like to keep it simple and stick to what I know helps our athletes.

Neutral Grip

When it comes to the benefits of a trap bar, I believe one of the keys is the use of a neutral grip. I am a huge fan of neutral grip exercises—whether it be upper or lower body, I think a neutral grip can really make a positive impact on our athletes’ results.

Oftentimes, grip can be a limiting factor in a deadlift. I have no issue with athletes working on their grip strength, but depending on the time of year or what their training schedule looks like, it may not be the best use of our time. Introducing a neutral grip can instantly take this issue away. Grip no longer becomes the limiting factor. As long as that athlete is in a field, track, or court sport and not a barbell sport, then it doesn’t negatively impact their results in any way.

Not only that, but switching from a mixed grip or a pronated grip to a neutral grip allows athletes to get a little bit better shoulder joint centration and shoulder blade retraction, two major cues that can also instantly improve their deadlift.

Center of Mass

Another really unique benefit of a trap bar is that the athlete actually stands inside the bar, rather than behind it. This puts the external load in a much different position relative to the athlete’s center of mass.

This can help athletes avoid lower back pain, injury, or discomfort because the load is in a much more advantageous position. Plus, with the benefits of a neutral grip, their lats and upper back are more engaged and less likely to lose positioning during straining points of the lift.

Traditional barbell deadlifts are amazing but might not be the best fit for everyone. Clean variations are great but might not be for everyone. Implementing a trap bar on jumps or deadlifts can give athletes a hybrid approach that allows them to find a better position to work from.

How We Use It

We use the trap bar in two very simple and effective ways: deadlift it and jump with it.

The trap bar deadlift is one of our main movements in terms of hip-dominant strength options. It has completely replaced the barbell deadlift in our programming. I love to program this lift to help athletes build up a heavy deadlift and strong posterior chain.

The trap bar deadlift is our force-driven exercise selection along the force-velocity curve. We sometimes go against bands or chains to increase velocity a little bit but still focus on heavier loads.

On the opposite end of the continuum, our velocity-driven selection is a trap bar jump. You can either choose to go all-out on velocity with much lighter loads and peak velocities in the 3.0 m/s range or focus more on power output with speeds more in the .85–1.25 m/s range. Both options definitely have their place.

Something that I’ve always found interesting is that the trap bar jump (from hang) allows us to put out more power and faster bar speed, at identical loads, compared to a hang power clean. Why?

• Possibly due to better leverages.

 

• Possibly due to a much easier learning curve.

 

• Less technique requirements could also be a factor.

I’m *this close* to calling the trap bar a standard must-have for all strength coaches. It’s just too versatile and valuable to not capitalize on, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

In the end, it’s definitely food for thought as to which may be a better choice for programming. At this point, I’m *this close* to calling the trap bar a standard must-have for all strength coaches. It’s just too versatile and valuable to not capitalize on.

3. Safety Squat Bar

The safety squat bar (SSB), sometimes called a yoke bar, is a unique bar with a wide array of benefits. Unlike the trap bar, which powerlifters kind of frowned upon, powerlifters popularized the SSB as a great training tool. And it is…for all types of athletes.

The unique design of the SSB, which rests on the athlete’s back and has a neutral grip handle at chest height and cambered ends, provides lifters with several key benefits that their body structures may not allow them to experience naturally.

Limits Shoulder Demands

One of the most important differences between a barbell and the SSB is the change in hand placement. Take, as an example, the traditional back squat: With a barbell, the athlete must place their hands on the bar to secure it throughout the lift. This is not easy for many athletes because of the demands of shoulder mobility. Similar to throwing a ball, achieving this position takes decent levels of shoulder abduction and external rotation. Not only do athletes need the mobility to reach this position, but also the strength and stability in that position to be able to support the bar.

With the SSB, the athlete can use the handles to secure the bar without any significant limitations at the shoulder. In rare cases, athletes may have a history of joint damage in the shoulder region that could be irritated by how the bar rests on their collarbone area. For the most part, though, using the SSB is like night and day for athletes who normally struggle to back squat.

Squats with the SSB and with a barbell do have slightly different levels of activation when it comes to muscle groups, but not enough to deem one better than the other. The two can work synergistically, or you can choose your favorite and probably not miss out on much from the other.

Hand-Assisted Lifts

Hand placement on the bar is a benefit, but my absolute favorite perk of the SSB is the hand placement off the bar. I am a huge fan of hand-assisted lifts using the SSB, often referred to as Hatfield variations. Implementing Hatfield SSB split squats, rear-foot-elevated split squats, and tempo squats has been one of the most game-changing decisions I’ve made over the last 10 years.

With the SSB, the athlete technically does not even need their hands to be on the bar because of how it is designed to rest right over the collarbones. This frees up the hands to perform hand-assisted lifting. Most of the time, racks will have mounted pegs/handles for these, but you could also rig up this setup by using an extra barbell against the rack.

You can choose to use the hand assistance for supramaximal load or supramaximal speed. Both have amazing neural benefits that can supercharge your athletes’ results.

How We Use It

As I alluded to earlier, Hatfield squat variations are the go-to for us with the SSB. There are so many ways to incorporate it for general strength, special strength, power, and speed.

I’ve been amazed watching athletes crush this lift for 2-3 times their body weight. No, we can’t really measure the hand assistance, but it’s still wildly impressive for athletes to single leg squat this amount of relative load.

You can get a high-quality safety squat bar for under $400. Buying dozens of these in a team setting would not be a bad investment, but I totally understand if the funds aren’t available. In the private sector, having one is plenty to get the job done, as you can get enough bang for your buck out of just having it available.

4. Swiss Bar

The Swiss bar, or football bar, is a multi-grip bar often used for pressing exercises. The bar designs vary, and all of them are extremely useful. Most Swiss bars feature at least three neutral grip options at various widths. More high-end bars may incorporate those neutral grips along with angled grips, also at different widths.

For presses, the Swiss bar is one of the most versatile tools coaches can use to help athletes find their optimal grip and posture, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

Athletes can press vertically or horizontally with the Swiss bar, performing the exercise standing, supine, or seated. For presses, this is one of the most versatile tools coaches can use to help athletes find their optimal grip and posture.

Grip Options

I’ve talked about the benefits of a neutral grip with the trap bar deadlift, and neutral grip alignment can also benefit our presses for the same reasons: better shoulder joint centration, better stability through the range of motion, and a more pain-free comfort level.

A neutral grip and/or altered grip width can also change the muscles emphasized throughout different points of a lift. The Swiss bar allows athletes access to multiple grip widths, something I’m a huge fan of when having athletes perform press-oriented lifts.

It’s extremely important for athletes to train in all zones along the force-velocity curve, spending time working on strength, power, and speed, respectively.

In the Westside Barbell speed bench (dynamic effort) method, they are very adamant that athletes train with at least three different grips during their dynamic bench press days. Those following Louie Simmons’ methods typically use a barbell and go narrow, normal, and then wide grip. Taking that concept, you can actually determine if a non-barbell bench press would be a better fit for the athlete and incorporate the same principles with different neutral or angled grips at other angles. Of course, this helps hit the muscle groups targeted at multiple angles and ranges, but also helps the athlete press pain-free and safely.

How We Use It

Staying on the topic of pressing, the Swiss bar is an elite option for doing just that. One of the most underrated aspects of improving sports performance is having an explosive and powerful upper body.

This is where I think a lot of coaches miss out on crucial gains. Many view the bench press only as an upper body strength exercise, and something that doesn’t transfer to certain sports. My outlook is different. I think the bench press is an amazing option to train in the power and speed ranges, and it transfers over to every sport.

Sprinting and jumping are two of the most athletic actions you can do, no matter the sport. Sprinting and jumping are both full body movements, and the upper body plays a crucial role in both. By incorporating speed bench press variations, you can improve your athlete’s upper body explosiveness, which can then transfer to better arm action during their jumps and sprints.

The Swiss bar is not only for presses, you can also use it for the same benefits with row variations such as seal rows or even use it as a varied-grip pull-up bar laid over the top of a power rack. For around $250, I think this can be one of the more valuable bars in any gym. If you work with a lot of overhead athletes, this would probably be a high-priority investment both in the team and private setting.

If you work with a lot of overhead athletes, the Swiss bar would probably be a high-priority investment both in the team and private setting, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

5. PVC Pipe

Last, but definitely not least, is PVC pipe. I realize this is a little out of left field but hear me out. PVC pipe may not be a strength training tool, but at a price point of around $2, it delivers a massive bang for your buck.

You can get plastic pipe at any local hardware store in various shapes and sizes. I’ve seen coaches make hurdles out of PVC pipes, make their own vertical jump testing system out of PVC, and even make water-based slosh pipes with it.

PVC pipes are also a great tool for technique enhancement for beginners to prep their movement patterns in a warm-up routine.

How We Use It

All of those innovations mentioned are great uses for PVC, but I’d like to really showcase how this simple tool can help your athlete’s speed development.

Overhead PVC runs, or fixed arm runs, really help the athlete utilize their hips more optimally in sprints and sprinting drills. In addition to faster and more powerful hips, it also forces the athlete to maintain great posture and integrity during drills.

PVC sprint drills can allow us to uncover breakdowns in an athlete’s techniques, especially in the lateral chain. Although perfect symmetry is usually not attainable, it is important to help get athletes as balanced as they can be whether it’s in the weight room or on the field, court, or track.

Evaluating ROI

All of these bars would be great to have, but there’s this little thing called money, and it doesn’t exactly grow on trees. Understanding program budgeting, finances, and ROI is something that most of our formal preparation for the strength and conditioning industry does not prepare us for.

When it comes to investing in a new piece of equipment, whether it’s $20 or $20,000, there are three simple questions that I ask myself to determine if this is a smart investment.

1. Does this product solve a problem? It doesn’t matter if it solves a single person’s problem or 20 problems at once. If it solves a problem, we can ask question number 2. If it doesn’t provide a solution to a clear-cut issue that you are experiencing as a coach, it’s not necessary. It may not be worth it at the moment.

If a product doesn’t provide a solution to a clear-cut issue that you are experiencing as a coach, it’s not necessary. It may not be worth it at the moment, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

I have always wanted wearable EMG garments. I’ve tried so hard to come up with a justification to get some. But they simply don’t solve a problem for me. In my setting, it’s not filling a true void.

2. Can I afford this product? Aside from starting up a new business where you may take on some debt or loans, this is a great question to ask yourself before any major purchase. If you want a $450 trap bar, but you don’t have $450 cash available at the snap of a finger, it may not be the right time.

That’s not to say definitely don’t pull the trigger, though. There are solutions. Maybe you can find a similar model for a lower cost. Maybe you can find a used bar for much cheaper. Maybe you can use a credit card with 0% interest for 12 months and pay it off monthly, if you’re in a position to do so. Or, as I mentioned earlier, maybe this is rolled into a start-up loan with a new business. Not having cash is not automatically a no, but it can help you dig deeper into the logistics.

When I started training, I was in a commercial setting and did not have any influence on the equipment available. I ran into a situation where I needed a trap bar. I had a client who experienced a lot of lower back pain during hinge-based exercises and I knew from personal experience that a trap bar would probably be a great move for him.

I went out and bought one for $200, kept it in my trunk, and brought it into the gym with me whenever I needed it. Sadly, I did not have $200 to my name at the time. I was living paycheck to paycheck. But I knew that if I got one, that client would provide me with revenue that exceeded $200 every month, so it ended up paying for itself in one month and turned out to be a fantastic investment. This is just an example of how you might still be able to pull it off even if it appears you can’t afford it.

3. Do I know how to use it? Lastly, are you ready to rock when you get this product? Hopefully, after reading this article about these bars, the answer is yes. But going back to the EMG wearables, even if I did get some, I’m not even sure if I’d know how to interpret the data, best practices on usage, etc.

Do your due diligence on the product. Make sure you do research and get the exact brand and model that suits your program the best. Read reviews, good and bad. Bad reviews are telling because you can see if someone else’s displeasure may have to do with the same reason you are thinking about purchasing. A one-star review for poor customer service and slow shipping? Eh. I can deal with that. A one-star review because the quality feels cheap and it rusted out in one year? Okay, that means something.

Seeing how other coaches use the product, and even what athletes think about it, will also be great feedback for any purchase you’re thinking about.

All of the above listed bars bring their own unique value and purpose to a training program. While they certainly aren’t necessary to get great work in, it’s hard for me to imagine our program without them. Equipment doesn’t make us better coaches, but if we leverage it correctly, we can definitely help our athletes find an edge in their training with special equipment.

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

Coaches and trainers often adopt movements that appear to have the greatest “transfer” to an athlete’s sporting discipline when designing a training program. Once they’ve deemed what they believe to be essential, they commonly scrap or disregard any movement outside of that for its relative ineffectiveness or inapplicability. Of course, we only have so much time to train, and we simply cannot do it all, but how do coaches decide what movements an athlete should do or what is most important? Is it as simple as taking what appears to work from a surface level and disregarding the rest?

Performance coaches commonly make decisions based on the assumption that if a sporting action moves through a given plane of motion, exercises replicating (or closely mimicking) the same action automatically correlate, thus reigning as superior to those that do not. Coaches then fight tooth and nail over programming elements—like whether athletes should back squat or not—saying that it doesn’t emulate a skill like sprinting and therefore is useless. In reality, however, when properly programmed and transferred into the skill of sprinting, squat lifts can most certainly enhance performance.

Most of these topics have been beaten to death over the years, and you can simply scroll through social media to find coaches throwing literature in one another’s faces to justify or assert their position. That is not the intention of this article—the goal, rather, is to inform the reader on why it is inadequate to rely on certain theories for programming, mainly the force-vector theory.

Understanding the Literature

The force-vector theory is a recurring concept that some coaches have leaned on, where movements are classified based on the direction in which force is expressed in relation to the global coordinate frame. This means that activities such as sprint acceleration would fall under the horizontal acceleration umbrella, whereas maximum velocity sprinting would reside under the vertical. Subsequently, “horizontal” or “vertical” exercises would be more specific to their respective categories.

While at first glance this may seem like a sound theory, the principle of dynamic correspondence contends otherwise, showing us that there truly is more to human kinetics than meets the eye. Sure, athletes require unique training methods depending on their sporting discipline, but we could argue that a number of universal movements assist athletes no matter what they are doing.

Sure, athletes require unique training methods depending on their sporting discipline, but we could argue that a number of universal movements assist athletes no matter what they are doing. Share on X

It’s easy to understand the assumption that an exercise loaded similarly to that of a particular sporting action is as simple as a 1 + 1 = 2 equation. Take the 2018 study that examined and directly compared the relationship of vertically directed exercises (loaded and unloaded vertical jumps and half squat) and horizontally directed exercises (hip thrust) to sprint performance in top-level track and field athletes.¹ Testing results for speed at the 10-, 20-, 40-, 60-, 100-, and 150-meter marks indicated that horizontally directed movements (hip thrusts) were more strongly associated with the maximum acceleration phase, whereas vertical movements (loaded and unloaded vertical jumps) were more strongly associated with top-end speed phases.

Loturco et al. concluded that “the force-vector theory is thereby an emergent methodological approach, based on a solid and well-established mechanical foundation.”¹ Essentially, this newfound theory would allow coaches to select exercises based on their relative direction and apply them to the specific phase of running or sport skill the individual athlete needs to improve. Boom! That’s it! All we need to do is train athletes with exercises loaded in a similar fashion to that of the plane they travel in their sport, right?

Sounds nice, but think again.

This is most certainly a broad generalization, and according to Fitzpatrick et al.², comes as a “direct opposition to the most commonly accepted criteria of mechanical specificity used in strength and conditioning, that is, the principle of dynamic correspondence.”

While it is true that during high-speed running, ground reaction forces are predominately vertical, whereas during acceleration, there is a greater horizontal force relative the global frame, it cannot be explained by the force-vector theory. Rather, it is simply due to the athlete’s body position.² During acceleration, the athlete must lean forward to project greater horizontal force, meaning that the ground reaction force relative to the global frame of the body is simply projected in a more horizontal fashion.

Kugler and Jahnsen⁴ demonstrated the same when looking at both horizontal and vertical jumping, finding that the direction of ground reaction force is relative to the athlete, and whether they travel forward or not depends on whether they lean forward. Thus, how the body and the ground reaction force are oriented at toe-off dictates where the athlete travels. This is all further proof that perhaps the development of strength, speed, and power in athletes across the board is more similar than some would like to admit.

Dynamic correspondence supports that activities like back squatting are, in fact, mechanically similar to more “horizontal” motions such as acceleration because the direction of the ground reaction force relative to the athlete is similar despite it being different in the global frame. There is a reason fundamental movement patterns (e.g., squat, hinge, lunge, press, pull, push, etc.) have been around so long in the general physical training of athletes and will continue to be—because they work in the development of foundational qualities needed across most sports.

What Matters Most

If we were to adopt the force-vector theory to guide our programming and decision-making, how would we know when a particular movement goes from being horizontal to vertical, and vice versa?

Take our acceleration and sprinting analogy—there is not an immediate change from one to the next, but rather a gradual shift in the ground reaction forces that propel the athlete forward. Even further, how does something like a hip thrust (knees flexed at 90 degrees) directly transfer to the ground reaction forces of an athlete during closed kinetic chain leg extension?² It certainly doesn’t, and neither do any other exercises for that manner, which is why we don’t program based on the idea of “replicating” what we see. Loturco et al.¹ were certainly on to something when they popularized the use of the hip thrust and similar type exercises, as these movements have been shown to have the potential for greater glute and hamstring activation versus the back squat, which may assist in more hip-dominant skills. That would be a more justified reason to select one exercise over another within a program, not that one happens to fall in line with the force-vector theory.

For this reason, we also must do our research and select an array of movements in our programming to determine what is most beneficial for our athletes, ultimately helping contribute to better athletic potential. Nick Winkelman said it best (and I paraphrase): Athletes are a lot like racecar drivers and we as coaches are a lot like mechanics. We don’t tell the athlete how to drive the car, we just help give them a better and higher performing car to drive.

Perhaps the greatest error a coach can make is getting stuck in the dogmatic thought process that lures many into believing that anything in human performance is universal, says @jimmypritchard_. Share on X

Perhaps the greatest error a coach can make is getting stuck in the dogmatic thought process that lures many into believing that anything in human performance is universal. The cliché “It depends” gets tossed around a lot, and rightfully so. Is a hip thrust better than a back squat for acceleration or speed development? It depends. Numerous factors play into the required development for an individual in their given sport and the forces they encounter on their body concerning the global frame.

Having a truly deep understanding of the sport in which the athlete participates, and subsequently the physiological, biomechanical, and competitive skills they must have to be successful, is no doubt the most important factor. This leads us to the realization that there are many ways to skin a cat, and in sport a multitude of ways to get to our destination. We should prioritize helping the athlete develop the ability to produce force and produce it quickly, or display greater feats of strength, power, endurance, and speed in the context of competition.

Application of Dynamic Correspondence in Exercise Selection

The force-vector theory prioritizes the direction of force relative to the global frame, while what is clearly most important is the direction of force relative to the athlete. Adopting this theory and applying it in practice is rather problematic in that it violates the basic tenets of the relationship between the way a body is oriented and the ground reaction forces that occur on it, thus creating a great deal of misunderstanding.

Obviously, we know that the more effective approach is to make decisions based on dynamic correspondence, but how does one actually do this?

The force-vector theory prioritizes the direction of force relative to the global frame, while what is clearly most important is the direction of force relative to the athlete, says @jimmypritchard_. Share on X

First and foremost, identify precisely what metric or performance parameter you wish to improve. Say, for example, that you know an athlete must improve their foot ground contact time while sprinting in order to get faster, and that a specific athlete is currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 85 milliseconds. Ask yourself what exercises or movements would most effectively improve this quality in order to get to a more desirable number, like 80 milliseconds? The right answer is whatever exercises increase the performance—and what certainly does not matter a bit is the direction in which they execute the movement.

By starting with the end in mind, it is easy to work backward from this end performance goal as well as decipher whether an exercise translates to performance or not. In the case of ground contact time, you may choose to incorporate an array of vertical, horizontal, and multidirectional plyometrics to improve performance.

Lastly, we must not forget that any and every action we choose to execute is in fact a supplement aimed at improving performance. It is easy to get lost in the minutiae of all the training details we encounter while working with athletes, but at the end of the day, whatever improves the athlete’s performance most is what really matters.

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. Loturco, I., Contreras, B., Kobal, R., et al. “Vertically and horizontally directed muscle power exercises: Relationships with top-level sprint performance.” PLoS One. 2018;13:e0201475.

2. Fitzpatrick, D.A., Cimadoro, G., and Cleather, D.J. “The Magical Horizontal Force Muscle? A Preliminary Study Examining the ‘Force-Vector’ Theory.” Sports. 2019;7:30.

3. Bryanton, M.A. and Chiu, L.Z. “Hip-versus knee-dominant task categorization oversimplifies multijoint dynamics.” Strength & Conditioning Journal. 2014;36:98-99.

4. Kugler, F. and Janshen, L. “Body position determines propulsive forces in accelerated running.” Journal of Biomechanics. 2010;43:343-348.

Building dynamic qualities and sustaining long-term growth within an athlete is an art. For new athletes beginning their sports performance journey, the simplest answer is often the most effective. Basic progressive overload and a consistent dose of sprinting and leaping goes a long way.

In the beginning, nearly anything reasonable works, but it will not work forever. As the athlete nears exhaustion of their initial adaptative reserves, it becomes critical to have a long-term strategy in place to maintain progress. This plan should include management of energy resources (acute versus chronic loading) as well as an effective means to develop specific muscular actions/contractions (isometrics, eccentrics, concentrics) by employing a variety of “similar, but not congruent” methods to tastefully shake things up at the appropriate time and avoid stagnation.

Speed-oriented exercises that can both dissect and ultimately rebuild the stretch-shortening cycle faster become necessary to maintain the growth of explosive attributes in an athlete. I like to affectionately refer to this process as “teasing out the twitch” because it is so delicate and unique to each individual athlete. With that said, you should view this blog post more as a compass and less as an absolute road map. It provides general insights accompanied with more specific “bang for your buck” exercises and examples to hopefully set you in the right direction and allow for your own critical thought and experimentation at important training crossroads.

Defining “Bounce”

It is easy to see when an athlete is light on their feet. However, expressing this quality in words can be a bit more difficult. Adjectives that describe bounce can be subject to interpretation and take on different meanings for different people. In the world of strength and conditioning this can be fodder for contentious debate.

Without getting too caught up in semantics, I find “bounce” to be synonymous with elasticity, which is defined as the ability of an object to return to its original state or shape after experiencing stress. Visually this aligns nicely with the simple one-dimensional model of the stretch-contraction cycle typically used to explain how muscles absorb and ultimately produce force. The tendons then provide the critical link, allowing transmission of energy from force-producing muscles to the skeletal system permitting movement. Since the entirety of the musculotendon apparatus is critical to movement, it is important to make sure both tendon and muscular function are developed equally. Unfortunately, all too often the tendons are overlooked at the expense of the muscles.

Lack of balance in the development of both tendons and muscles will not only limit performance but also put an athlete at risk for injury, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

It’s easy to become fixated on exclusively chasing muscular development. After all, the muscles are the most conspicuous and quickest to adapt, allowing for faster appreciable change, so they become the ultra-attractive, low-lying fruit. Tendons are stubborn—like ligaments, they have poor blood flow and are significantly slower to develop as a result. Tendons lack the same visibility that muscles do, so out of sight, out of mind can frequently apply. Just keep in mind, lack of balance in the development of both tendons and muscles will not only limit performance but also put an athlete at risk for injury. Too much, too fast can cause unnecessary and easily avoidable setbacks.

Extensive Ground Contacts: Building a Strong Foundation

Slow cooking the intensification process is always best practice as it relates to training in general but maybe even more so as it relates to building better bounce. As previously stated, tendons are slow to budge, so subtlety is most effective. This contrasts with the more overt measures required to develop the explosive, muscular-driven torque created by heavy squats, pulls, and presses, as well as singular throws and jumps. Elasticity is delicate and needs to be coaxed out gently. Extensive ground contacts then fall under the broader umbrella of posture, balance, and rhythm drills that are designed to both condition soft tissues and develop a high degree of familiarity with the ground.

Video 1. Simple rebound jumps for stiffness are the cornerstone for learning to bounce with elasticity. Do them multiple times a week to get better—far more effective than lazy sessions of skipping rope.

I always stress with my athletes in the Riverhounds Development Academy that I want them to be able to feel the ground without having to look at it. One of the most telling things I see with young athletes (and older athletes who lack formal training) is their propensity to want to look where they are going at all times with eyes fixed on the ground. This immediately lets me know they at least subconsciously do not trust their own movements when decisive movement with conviction should always be the aspiration.

In general, basic low-impact, two-footed rhythm hopping in all planes of motion is a great starting point for soft tissue prep as well as posture, balance, and rhythm. These drills can be progressed to one leg to drive proprioceptive abilities that push for higher degrees of self-awareness. These same drills can then be translated into more run-specific motor patterns such as skips, prances, gallops, and dribbling.

Pogo Hops, Progressions

My love for pogo hops has no bounds, pun intended! It is perhaps the single most effective exercise for establishing posture, balance, and rhythm. “Strong as steel head to heel” is a simple way to reinforce just how valuable the entirety of the body is to even the most rudimentary drills. Maintaining a neutral head position with eyes fixed forward and not down is also critical to the final quality regarding execution.

My love for pogo hops has no bounds, pun intended! It is perhaps the single most effective exercise for establishing posture, balance, and rhythm, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

As previously suggested, rhythmic hopping in place with good posture is the goal, but it is not necessarily as easy as it sounds on paper. Common pitfalls include piking at the hips and eyeing down, which typically contributes to the piking as result of inefficient posture. One of the first things they teach young gymnasts is that the body will follow the head, so being extra critical of head positioning becomes important for all extensive plyos. Posture and movement standards begin here, so you must coach them hard. If an athlete cannot maintain position or defaults to poor shapes under limited duress, there is no way they will magically adopt the appropriate position under the more intense conditions experienced in maximal outputs such as sprints, leaps, and heavy lifts.

Video 2. Hops should be done in all directions and at all angles. Side-to-side options are great for cutting and reducing ACL risk.

The best place to start is the athlete beginning with two feet in place and going for as long as they can maintain quality. “Quality” is subjective, so make sure you know exactly what you are looking for. For me, I specifically want to see the extensors of the ankles and knees working in a coordinated manner while maintaining the previously mentioned good posture. As a coach, it should not only look rhythmic but sound rhythmic. You should be able to look away (depending on surface and footwear interaction, of course) and still know the objective is being achieved.

This is a great opportunity for coaches to warm up as well. Acuity in a coach’s senses is rarely if ever talked about, but it needs to be trained just as much as their athletes’ bodies do. Each individual athlete will have their own nuance in movement strategy and unique cadence, so using low-level extensive work to familiarize yourself to the individuality of the athlete is helpful.

After an athlete demonstrates comfort in place, the addition of mobility in all planes of motion—sagittal, frontal, and transverse—under the auspices of maintaining fluid, rhythmic bounce are simple progressions. From this point, removing the arms in a variety of manners is a subtle way to progress and avoid stagnation. Removing the arms immediately forces an athlete to stabilize through the core in a more specific and functional manner. Ground-based anti-rotation and anti-extension work will always have a place, particularly on low-CNS days when it is best just to get an athlete off their feet. But when given the opportunity and choice, opting to incorporate bracing within extensive skill work is an effective time management strategy.

Hands on hips, hug, plane, prisoner position (hands behind head) and arms extended overhead are all great variations, and each brings their own unique problem that the athlete must solve. Typically, the higher you hold your arms and the further you spread your arms out from the center of mass, the harder it becomes to maintain stability. Here there is no right or wrong, as there are unlimited degrees of freedom and myriad progressions, so feel free to experiment. Just make sure you do not lose the plot.

If positioning becomes disruptive to the rhythm and quality of ground contact, regress or change trajectory. Adding subtle constraints would be the next step—small hurdles and low boxes or stairs are great options to challenge the athlete’s spatial awareness. Like anything, constraints have their time and place, so it’s best to fall in like as opposed to love with certain modalities and drills.

As with the arm positioning, feel free to explore and experiment, but just be mindful it does no harm to the skill and coordination of the drill. Since most constraints require hopping onto or over something, too often these exercises become a demonstration of “knee tucking” instead of ground striking, and there is a huge difference between the latter and the former.

Not All Extensive Hopping Is Created Equal – Think LATERAL!

If extensive multiplanar hopping is the gold standard for movement and tissue prep, then more lateral single-leg and rotational single-leg ground contacts are the platinum and double platinum standards, respectively. They are so important and unique that they warrant their own subsection within the intensification process. Great intensification within the individual session is so subtle that it is hard to discern where the warm-up ends, and the work truly begins.

While making sure to be mindful and not rush this process, the quicker you can progress an athlete to one leg and moving laterally and eventually rotating, the better. One-leg hopping is a great way to organically increase an athlete’s self-awareness without overly complicating the process. To fulfill rhythmic bouncing on one leg, an athlete must strike the ground correctly right under their center of mass. What an athlete might be able to get away with on two legs, they cannot hide on one. Single leg hopping then becomes a great litmus test for a lot of important athletic qualities.

What an athlete may be able to get away with on two legs, they can’t hide on one. Single leg hopping then becomes a great litmus test for a lot of important athletic qualities, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

Merging single leg benefits with greater glute medius recruitment by moving laterally amplifies the return on time management investment. Efficiency is accomplishing more by doing less and should always be the goal of the training process. Thus, one-leg lateral movement has extraordinary “bang for your buck.”

While traditional glute/hip band walks have value, they lack the velocities experienced on the field. The increased speed demands crank up stresses ever so slightly and fire up the nervous system in turn. Adding rotations and arm constraints “doubles down” on the neural recruitment, sending proprioceptive feedback through the roof.

Joint Angle-Specific Isometrics

Developing isometric strength by holding task-specific joint angles is a great way to add integrity and back the extensive ground contacts with some serious substance. These positions are highly specific to each individual due to differences in limb lengths and torque-producing tendencies, so it is important to put the athlete in positions that are both advantageous and disadvantageous for performance at times. Isometric holds in unfavorable positions are great ways to address weak points and enhance general preparedness qualities while advantageous positioning fortifies already strong kinematic positions. Both are necessary, but sport specificity is found in the more favorable angles yielding a greater performance effect, so having a strong idea of what you would like to accomplish with isometrics and working backward becomes helpful.

Holding sport-specific positions allows an athlete to feel critical intermuscular and intramuscular links before complicating with movement and velocity. Experience has shown that simultaneously intertwining extensive ground contacts and isometric holds proves to be a formidable stimulus to really “grease the groove” and prepare the athlete for the more intensive efforts to follow. As it relates to positioning, a good hold should begin on the ball of an athlete’s foot and unify the ankle, knee, and hip extensors (soleus, VMO, glute med/max).

Video 3. Simple medial hops were popularized by Ted Banks in the 1970s and can be traced to when Bud Winter was coaching high jump. Remember, speed athletes need to be good at simple plyometrics, not be competitive horizontal jumpers.

Athletes should never be caught flat-footed, and this is a great opportunity to reinforce this sentiment. The more “acute” the joint angles an athlete can adopt, the more aggressive their athletic position. Acute is typically far from comfortable, so isometrics become a great way to condition the athlete to becoming comfortable with being uncomfortable.

For dosing, I have found 10- to 15-second efforts of max intensity appear to be optimal for allowing the individual to maximize tension and maintain high quality. To progress the holds, I prefer to increase intensity as opposed to increasing duration. You can accomplish this by placing the athlete in a more challenging position, adding load, or incorporating contract relax-type principles.

The contract relax method is unique because it requires the athlete to quickly relax and recreate tension with tiny oscillations at the specific joint angle in question. I like this because it captures the best of both worlds with respect to position while encouraging subtle movement, which more closely resembles what is happening real time on the field, as athletes are not statues. Specifically, a simple superset of a loaded isometric immediately followed by an unloaded oscillatory iso is a great way to quickly fire up the nervous system!

Concentrics: Overcoming Inertia

Newton’s first law of motion states that an object at rest will remain at rest or an object in motion will remain in motion unless acted on by an external force. Being able to harness these forces means everything to an athlete. Moving explosively out of static positions, then being able to skillfully maintain and eventually stopping or redirecting is a tremendous undertaking. Therefore, I often like to remind our athletes that inertia is an athlete’s best friend and worst enemy at the same time, the ultimate catch 22!

Specifically as it relates to “bounce,” deliberately disrupting the rhythmic fluidity of extensive ground contacts at certain times is a neat trick to maintain continual progress. Eliminating the stretch phase and forcing an athlete to overcome any variety of static positions with a dynamic movement are the simplest ways to go about developing this unique quality. The classic example of this is the relationship between the squat jump (no stretch) and countermovement jump (stretch).

Eliminating the stretch phase and forcing an athlete to overcome any variety of static positions with a dynamic movement are the simplest ways to go about developing this unique quality. Share on X

The countermovement jump should be about 10-15% better than the squat jump. If the margin of difference is too narrow (< 10%), more “bounce” development is in order; conversely, if the separation is too extreme (> 20%), more strength is likely needed. For strength building and the efforts skewed more toward maximal force and rate of force development on the force-velocity curve, concentric-only deadlifts—trap bar deadlifts with different starting heights with different stances—are great for developing an athlete’s ability to overcome. However, if it is speed you seek, med ball throws are king.

Video 4. Adding an external load and larger knee angle will decrease the elastic energy, but it does teach the body to use momentum properly. Experiment with ways to jump efficiently without tendons and elastic energy.

To stay on topic with the concentric-only theme, I am specifically referencing concentric-only “scoop” throws both vertically forward and overhead backward, or any other throw from a static position. Med balls are great because they are subtle. They are heavy enough to enhance feedback but still light enough to really create some velocity.

When it comes to incorporating speed with concentrics, I gravitate more toward throws, as I see them as an opportunity to very lightly load. Additionally, in my experience, releasing an object naturally teaches extension better than not releasing an object, as athletes capitalize on continuing to accelerate as joint angles become increasingly favorable. When emphasizing development of maximal outputs like speed and power, which tend to skew toward heavy (strength speed, max force) or ultra-fast (bodyweight sprints and jumps), it’s often easy to overlook the value of more subtle means like lightly weighted throws.

Mastery over Stretch Reflex: Hit the Brakes!

The stretch reflex is one of the most powerful tools an athlete possesses, and developing powerful brakes with hard decelerations and landings from various heights and angles is an invaluable way to challenge the eccentric muscular function under more sport-specific velocities. Slow eccentrics will always have their place in training and are of great value to young athletes establishing positions as well as more advanced athletes deliberately seeking increased time under tension during periods of general prep for instance. However, outside of a handful of specific scenarios, fast eccentrics will always have greater carryover to the field.

Athletes endure lots of stress from the high velocities and abrupt braking forces, and they cannot efficiently overcome what they cannot first absorb. To deal with greater forces, bigger brakes must be built with a good strength training regime and more sport-specific decelerations and landings. If an athlete struggles to deal with these stresses, the resulting visual is continually being a step behind and, even worse, potentially one step away from soft tissue injury.

Video 5. Looking at the medial hops again, you can see how the foot contacts are long enough to help roll the body towards the inside.

Gradually preparing the athlete for higher forces in training then becomes important, and building an athlete’s braking apparatus by gradually increasing eccentric velocities becomes the fourth and final piece to accompany the low-intensity ground contacts, sport-specific isometric positioning, and concentric medicine ball throws. The human body is incredibly resilient and will adapt to the demands imposed on it (SAID principle). An athlete can then be gradually conditioned to endure greater and greater magnitudes of stress in training, so when exposed to the same scenarios within the game, they are first and foremost likely to stay healthy and, as a by-product, perform at a higher level.

“Extreme training” in a highly controlled and tastefully progressed manner best prepares an athlete for the field of play. Limiting an athlete to submaximal outputs in training and merely hoping for the best typically never goes as intended on match day.

Decelerations, Altitude Landings

My starting point for high-velocity eccentrics begins with simple two-footed “snap downs.” To execute properly, an athlete starts tall in a fully extended position and then must move with maximal intent into a flexed, athletic position as quickly as possible. In essence, they are violently jumping straight down and abruptly hitting the brakes trying to freeze as if they are a statue in their joint angle-specific athletic set. Again, this will vary from athlete to athlete because of different heights and limb lengths, so it’s not necessary to try to fit square pegs into round holes.

Athletes should move their feet during the landing process, and as they get increasingly better and better at the skill, the landings should get louder and louder. As a coach you should be able to HEAR the force. As they move their feet, it is equally important that an athlete specifically locate the balls of their feet. It does the athlete no good to land flat-footed, as this is the last thing we want happening on the field.

Braking with maximal purpose and abruptly locating balance on the balls of the feet is much trickier than it looks, so it is good to drill it continuously to reinforce development for youth athletes and quickly touch on it frequently as professionals even if during warm-ups. To progress the snap down slowly, adding heights of just a few inches at a time subtly increases the stress upon landing. Again, the strictest landing mechanics must be maintained, as eventually there will be a specific height for each individual at which the quality degrades and intended effect is lost. Quality always supersedes quantity and best to “stop a mile early than one inch late.” Next would be adding lateral falls and falls with twists and eventually restarting the entire process over on one leg in a similar progressive manner.

Drop Jumps, Depth Jumps

After thoroughly dissecting the stretch-shortening cycle, drop jumps and depth jumps tie the entire stretch reflex together again. Upon falling from a height, the athlete now must quickly reverse the landing upon ground contact and leap explosively vertically, horizontally, or eventually off a single leg. Initiating with a fall increases an athlete’s acceleration prior to takeoff and, if executed correctly, should yield higher resultant force. Simply put, athletes should be able to jump higher or bound further after the fall.

Video 6. Box to Bounce to Box is nothing more than depth jumps with the right height. Monitor the Reactive Strength Index (RSI) in order to make changes in box heights.

If an athlete lacks the requisite strength and the fall hinders performance, then you should regress the exercises to a lower height, or they should not do them until they are strong enough. The amount of time spent on the ground is directly proportional to the height of the fall so attention to detail really matters, and it is important to know the desired effect. Drop jumps are more speed-oriented and require quicker ground contacts, so box heights must be lower.

Visually they look like a pogo with limited knee bend and maximal lower limb stiffness upon reversal. However, depth jumps are slightly more force-oriented and require more hip-dominant torque so encourage slightly greater heights, and they closely resemble your typical countermovement jump. Both variations are necessary, particularly when the goal is to tease out highly specific qualities. For instance, if you look at ground contact times of sprinters, the slowest grounds contacts occur during the first propulsive steps of acceleration, and the fastest ground contacts are demonstrated during max velocity.

Despite the subtle variations in speed and execution that exist between the two exercises, they both fall under the same distinction of plyometric exercise designed to enhance the speed of the stretch-shortening cycle and are just slightly varying degrees of FAST! Simple jumping and rate of force development exercises such as weighted jumps and throws often get mischaracterized into this category. For an exercise to be a plyometric it must have a fast ground contact (approximately 0.2 seconds) and specifically address enhancing the speed of stretch, transition, and contraction.

Be mindful that these specific types of plyometrics are force- and energy-intensive, so you need to closely monitor volume and use them only sparingly. I liken drops and depth jumps to a “NOS button” for performance, and I like to use them prior to more significant competitions or showcases for our youth academy or to quickly burst through a training plateau and jump-start further progress.

Keep It Simple!

Maximizing bounce and developing any speed-related quality takes time, as it is the last adaptation to manifest itself, so extreme patience is required. Good development should never be rushed—maintain a process-oriented approach and stay the course with the lower-intensity, skill-building, extensive ground contacts and the obligatory strength work to maintain health and build power, and it will pay off in the long run. This truly should comprise most of an athlete’s training, as it keeps them prepared and healthy. After all, there’s no ability like availability!

Maximizing bounce and developing any speed-related quality takes time, as it is the last adaptation to manifest itself, so extreme patience is required, says @houndsspeed. Share on X

Tastefully injecting more intensive plyometrics in controlled doses at just the right time will raise the ceiling just enough to make sure trends can always remain favorable, but it’s all about picking and choosing your moments. Doing the simple stuff better and being able to get the simple stuff to create the desired effects is truly the name of the game in the end, and it will keep your athlete light and springy along their athletic journey.