Blog

With the recent boom in technological advances, it is becoming increasingly common practice to use equipment that measures various aspects of athletic performance to follow progressions from baseline throughout the training process. Some of these metrics include velocity, timing, vertical jump height, distance, power output, bar path and bar speed, ground contact times, and much more.

The presence of these devices has been shown to increase intent and motivation, which positively affects performances in training, as athletes are in a perpetual state of chasing personal records in each measurable statistic. Many of these personal bests are then championed on social media by coaches and athletes from all over the world, whether in an attempt to advertise the effectiveness of their program, demonstrate principles of different programs sweeping social media, or in some cases, for trainers or coaches to “flex” their superiority over other coaches posting similar metrics for all to see.

While chasing personal bests has a great positive effect on performance, there are unintended and often undetected consequences of this approach to training, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

All personal bests deserve to be celebrated, and I applaud all of the coaches that do, regardless of their motive. What I will say, however, is that while chasing personal bests has a great positive effect on performance, there are unintended and often undetected consequences of this approach to training.

PR or Bust

How many practices have large numbers of athletes who do not hit personal bests at all? How many whoo-hoos and hoorahs are distributed among those athletes? Must an athlete run a personal best to get that response from their coach? What about the athletes who follow their coaches on social media and never see their name mentioned because they don’t run personal bests at practice? Are these athletes now feeling undervalued in their respective programs because they aren’t good enough to earn celebrations either in practice or on social media? There may be personal bests for some athletes, but for the vast majority, running a personal best every day is not a sustainable reality.

The PR-or-bust mentality polarizes athlete responses to training and affects subsequent reps within the session as well as after. It also sets these athletes up to revolve their self-worth around this idea of absolute success or absolute failure. While at first glance this may not seem like a major issue, how many athletes run personal bests every single practice?

If an athlete ran a 0.01-second personal best every practice, they would eventually be faster than a cheetah and approach the speed of light. While it would be amazing if this was something we could achieve as humans, I don’t believe our anatomical structures or physiological capacities will be ready to produce those kinds of forces any time soon.

I take particular issue with this because I, too, fell victim to this PR-or-bust approach to training my athletes. I celebrated personal bests while chalking up “shortcomings” as something that I could not control. I convinced myself that it must be something athletes were doing outside of training that affected their performances.

While my inclination could have very well been true, it did not sit well with me to see my athletes leaving training sessions with their heads down in disappointment. After several weeks of reflecting on this issue, I began wondering if there was anything I could do in training to help resolve this unintended consequence of a culture that equates achievement with obtaining personal bests while carelessly leaving behind those who appear to have plateaued or regressed.

By only placing extreme emphasis on absolute maximum running and only measuring a couple of variables, such as the fly 10-yard sprint or the 40-yard dash, we severely limit opportunities for athletes to see growth. If they do not hit a personal best that day in either of those metrics, they are kind of left reeling and wondering what they did wrong to not be at their absolute best every single day.

By only placing extreme emphasis on absolute maximum running and only measuring a couple of variables, we severely limit opportunities for athletes to see growth, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

I thought to myself that if I could create more opportunities to run personal bests, it would fix the issue and restore motivation, as well as perceived self-worth, at the conclusion of our sprint sessions. So, I started timing each segment of each rep.

For example, a 2×20, 2×30, 2×40 would include Freelap data from each 10-yard segment of each rep, the total automatic time, and the total hand time. Initially, it worked, but eventually the athletes plateaued again. With that, their moods regressed, and the dopamine surges came less and less frequently. I was still conditioning them to behave in this fashion by the way I structured my data collection, and this was now the most obvious issue that I needed to resolve.

 

What Comes Next?

We have now been timing our sprints for several months and the personal bests have stopped coming. The excitement and joy associated with the novelty of timing and intrinsic competitiveness have begun to deteriorate. The athletes have regressed below their baseline levels of intent, motivation, and dopamine responses. The smiling faces and high-fives have diminished because their sense of self-worth and achievement was so deeply rooted in these personal bests that were conditioned into them by their new culture of measuring.

As a coach, you may become frustrated and question what you did wrong. You measured, you made it fun, you took out the fluff from your program to cater to your athletes, and you now wonder, “What do I do now? What comes next? How do we get back on track with all of these personal achievements and team positivity?”

Well, if we know speed is king, then we certainly shouldn’t stop sprinting, performing plyometrics, or measuring. But maybe there is something valuable that we aren’t measuring or including in our interpretation of the data that could give us more perspective on the situation. Eventually, I brainstormed a new way to collect and use data that may address these issues: the rolling average.

Discovering the Rolling Average Concept

The concept of the rolling average is not a new one, though I have not seen it broadcast all over social media the way I have seen personal bests and daily leaders. My thought process regarding this particular metric stemmed from a variety of things, the main one being that I needed to find a way to widen the window for perceived success in the athletes that I work with. I believed that accomplishing this would create not only more, but also bigger, opportunities for that coveted dopamine response that is frequently talked about in sports psychology.

By using every available data point within a given time frame to create these rolling averages, we are not only better able to see where we have been, but also where we are going. For example, in the PR-or-bust data setup, I only included PR splits and improvement from baseline. On any given day when an athlete does not achieve a personal best, neither data point moves, and the athlete perceives that their performances have become stagnant or even regressed. Self-worth is jeopardized, and the athlete leaves with a looming sense of failure.

With the rolling average approach to training, I still track PR splits and improvement, but there is an added column for the rolling average for each metric in order to show the athlete their total body of work. Every single data point affects the rolling average, and the way it is influenced gives a more valuable snapshot as to what may be occurring in the training process. Before every training session, I read each athlete their current averages on each metric (0-10 yard, 10-20 yard, 20-30 yard, etc.) so that as soon as I give them their times, they know how it compares to what they’ve collectively done previously.

Every single data point affects the rolling average, and the way it is influenced gives a more valuable snapshot of what may be occurring in the training process, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

You may note a positive, negative, or neutral trend on any given day and throughout any number of days or weeks. A positive trend compared to the rolling average shows that the athlete is collectively better than they have been, and the training process may be working. A prolonged negative trend may indicate overtraining, tentativeness from potential soft tissue injuries, the training stimulus may not be enough, or that it is not working in general.

This would be a great time to introduce a deload phase or figure out whether you need to ramp the training stimulus up or down overall. Talk with the athlete about rest, recovery, nutrition, stress management, school, life, and other important factors in their lives that may be impacting their performance.

Remember, just as it is not feasible to improve PRs every single session, the trends of the rolling average may undulate throughout various training phases. During an intentional heavy loading phase, you may notice some of these metrics fall off a cliff—this is an expected response to a heavy stimulus. When you strategically deload following this heavy stimulus, you may notice that the trends are overwhelmingly positive. Again, this is expected, as adaptation to your heavy loading phase has now taken place and the athlete is collectively in a better position than they were previously.

Be sure to educate your athletes on these phenomena so they understand they are not getting worse, but these are expected outcomes given the training loads. Prefacing this will likely change their outlook when the measurements don’t show them what they are intrinsically wired to seek: personal improvement. This is another reason the rolling average is great, because when the PRs aren’t coming during these loading phases, the window for perceived improvement is wider, and they will still have opportunities to appreciate collective growth.

Comparing the Two Approaches

The premise behind only tracking and celebrating personal bests—while initially adequate, competitive, and fun—sets up the athlete for an eventual plateau and perceived regression, which may translate to feelings of self-doubt and failure. It also fails to track other positive changes that may be occurring on any given day, and that lack of information can make or break an athlete’s intent, motivation, and dopamine response, which is ironic given that this is exactly what we believe we are chasing by conducting our program in this manner.

The premise behind only tracking and celebrating personal bests sets the athlete up for an eventual plateau and perceived regression, which can lead to feelings of self-doubt and failure. Share on X

Running a personal best every session is unsustainable and unrealistic, and it creates a toxic culture that leaves those who are not improving isolated and searching for positivity in their training experience, while temporarily parading around those who have not yet hit that point in their training. The goal of training is always to raise the ceiling on competitive performances, but the process of doing so does not consist of a never-ending positive slope throughout. Additionally, because this approach is not sensitive to the trends of performance, it makes it impossible to make critical changes to programming for individual athletes. A one-size-fits-all approach to training may initially seem great because it is simple and easily applied, but it fails to help the individuals who do not respond well to a general training method.

By shifting to a rolling average approach, we begin to give more perspective on what the athletes have done and in which direction they are going. It creates a training environment that is more sensitive to measuring and effectively tracking all levels of improvement while also informing the athlete and the coach of trends that are occurring throughout. Coaches can then use this information to make changes to programming for individuals and allow for more specialized training to take place.

While I’ve only used the concept for athletes sprinting 60 yards or less, I believe this concept extrapolates well to many measurements obtained from training, which can then be used to influence prescription one way or the other. It effectively widens the window for perceived improvement and allows for more of the athletes you’re training to partake in their own personal victories—even the small ones such as running all reps on a given day 0.01 seconds faster than their rolling average.

This is not to say that this method of data collection is superior to any other, but I began to utilize it in order to gather more information about each individual’s training process and to inform me of whether training appears to be working. Another reason I shifted to this model was to decrease the frequency with which athletes were left feeling like they’d accomplished nothing. It is one thing to feel like you got a great workout in; it is another to have objective, measurable improvement during that workout.

Any good coach will be able to spin even the bad days in such a way that athletes feel like they had a successful day. However, by leaving out certain variables, we could miss out on what is occurring in the bigger picture. The less we measure, the fewer opportunities there are for this perception of success to occur. The more we measure, and how broadly we are able to measure, the more it not only creates more opportunities, but also widens the margin by which personal improvement is objectively obtainable.

In the event that improvement is not occurring, we are able to go back and see how long it has been this way. Is it a small blip in the otherwise relatively positive trend? Has it been consistently negative or neutral for several weeks? What have we done to address it to right the ship? What can we do moving forward to affect these trends and impact the performance trends in a positive way?

Bringing It All Together

So, I’ve now covered several bases regarding data collection and organization that may help contribute to a more sustainable training model, as well as a more realistic and positive experience for the athletes. Training performances wax and wane as the season progresses, and that is okay. Just be sure that you and your athletes are aware of these changes throughout training so that expectations meet reality and athletes aren’t left wondering why their performances aren’t constantly improving.

Additionally, being forward and transparent with your athlete in these circumstances will increase trust and buy-in and improve the coach-athlete relationship as training progresses in the future. As far as application goes, the recent surge in timing device availability and utility has shifted the training paradigm from what would have been considered a high-volume and submaximal approach to being more focused on low volume and absolute intensity. This may not be a popular opinion, but there is more to the training process than each approach in isolation.

This may not be a popular opinion, but there is more to the training process than each approach in isolation, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

By using the low-volume training/absolute maximal velocity approach, whether it be a fly 10-yard sprint or a 40-yard dash, we do great things such as maximizing speed and intent and creating a much more exciting practice environment. Another benefit to this level of training is that it frequently exposes the brain and the body to positions that are needed for maximum intensity sprinting. This is excellent when preparing for competitions, as when the time comes for you to compete at that level, your body easily calls on the movement patterns that you’ve hardwired for sprinting, and the CNS has been prepped and primed to fire at this level of intensity.

The potential pitfall is when the athlete becomes accustomed to clenching and fighting as hard as they can for these personal bests that they chase each and every day. While it is great to expose them to this intensity in training and use the timing systems to obtain this intensity and intrinsic desire to be better, there is a level of relaxation that must occur in sprinting to raise the ceiling on results. If an athlete gives it their all and fights to the finish on every rep, they may find it difficult to relax enough to achieve these higher levels of performance and improve the range at which they can comfortably train.

On top of this, there’s a tendency for the wheels to fall off beyond the desired distance. If I have an athlete sprint 20 yards into a fly 10-yard zone, they have programmed themselves to set 30 yards as the finish and put their all into that 30 yards—meaning there is nothing left to continue beyond that point. While great for training and testing, what happens on a big play in competition? Will their velocities significantly fall off after 30-40 yards, as we frequently see on television?

When the eventual plateau hits, where do we go from there? Is it possible to deload from a low-volume approach? Are we flexible enough to admit that we should be sprinting further (60- to 100-yard+ repetitions) occasionally to improve our ability to not only achieve top speed, but hold onto it and decrease the rate of deceleration? Are there ways we can alter the programming to improve, or do we just keep going at it in the hope of eventually having a breakthrough?

Using the high-volume training/lower-intensity approach builds a large aerobic base that allows the athlete to handle lower speeds for longer durations and improves the repeat sprint ability. The catch is that, because the athletes aren’t exposed to maximal speeds often enough, their ability to hold speed is negated by the fact that their max speed potential has not been obtained. So, while it is great that they can essentially run forever and be an ironman at practice, if they don’t maximize the speed component, they will still get burnt in races, games, meets, etc.

The other downfalls of this approach to training are the tendencies to overtrain athletes and contribute to burnout. Under extremes of this approach, you may notice athletes’ overall energy levels are diminished, their ability to run fast at all is dampened due to a chronic CNS volume overload, and they may eventually get overuse injuries and weakened immune systems or even lose their passion due to the nature of this monotonous style of training programming. There is also more to training than doing nothing but submaximal intensity training at high volumes every day.

Athletes have been successful at the highest level under each training approach, as well as some who strike a balance between the two. So, while great for preventing deceleration and having topped-out endurance for games and meets, the ability to maximize speed suffers, and therefore overall performance suffers as well. Additionally, because we don’t sprint often, the shapes that pertain to maximal sprinting are not easily hardwired into our movement patterns. When we go from submaximal training to the real thing, we may see an increased frequency of injuries due to poor movement, and the CNS is not primed to fire at that level.

As before, we must ask the question: Where do we go from here? Are we flexible enough in our ways that we allow for the implementation of more maximum speed work to counter these flaws? Do we allow for more rest days and active recovery days? Are we comfortable lowering the volume in favor of increasing intensity? Will it be okay to allow the athletes longer rest intervals between repetitions, or will it be too much of a culture shock to simply allow them to stand around to recover for the next rep? Can you see that there is a level of maximal speed qualities that needs to be obtained in order to achieve optimal performance beyond enduring the competition?

Interestingly enough, many coaches have had success with both approaches to training, but other coaches have questioned whether these training methods were sufficient or whether they could be improved upon by addition or subtraction. While training Carl Lewis, Tom Tellez had staples in his program that included 6x200m and other longer submaximal runs. Clyde Hart had success coaching with a quantity-to-quality approach. Tony Holler and his Feed the Cats program have had a lot of success with a “less is more approach.” All three coaches have had athletes achieve success on the biggest stages. Is it that the athletes fit their programming just right or that each approach is sufficient as it stands to produce similar results?

I propose finding a middle ground between them, or a sort of hybrid approach. I don’t mean to train at moderate intensities frequently, but rather, balancing the maximal work with the submaximal work in a meaningful way and tactfully choosing when measurement will benefit rather than take away from each. I’ll add that there is no right or wrong way to program as long as you build your program around the important qualities you want to improve in training, providing optimal recovery, and progressing the training in a realistic and meaningful way.

There is no right or wrong way to program as long as you build your program around the important qualities you want to improve in training, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

I use this hybrid approach when training myself and my athletes, and it has appeared to be pretty effective thus far. I will go into different aspects of hybrid programming and how I choose to implement measurement within each.

 

Biomechanics

I base my approach to all training around the premise of efficient and optimized movement. While there are schools of thought that totally disregard movement, I believe that sports are based on a foundation of movement and neglecting that foundation imposes limitations on performance qualities while also at times subjecting athletes to greater risks of injury.

Measuring movement is tricky, as it is difficult to objectively quantify and determine which movements are faulty and which are compensations for the faults. However, with a trained eye, knowledge of various movement qualities, and slow-motion feedback, it is often easy to pick apart optimal versus suboptimal movement. I then use this information to figure out which cues, drills, plyometrics, and other exercises I’d like the athlete to perform to rewire the faulty movements and promote the qualities I’m seeking. This topic could be a whole article in itself, and I will save the nuances of movement for another time.

 

Plyometrics

Similar to the biomechanical aspect of my approach to training, I also look for faulty movement patterns that may present themselves in sprinting. I still use video feedback to find the faults and to inform my next steps with a particular athlete or group of athletes in a session. Additionally, plyometrics are great for complementing the focus of the training session.

For example, during an acceleration-themed session where horizontal displacement and rate of force production are key to success, I will pick and choose variations of certain plyometrics to incorporate to develop these traits. Similarly, for top speed days when vertical forces are more desired, I switch my plyometric orientation to developing vertical power and stiffness to transmit forces.

Do not simply do plyometrics just to do them—do them with a particular purpose in mind. If you cannot give a reason for them to be in your program, chances are you’re just doing “stuff.” We want to replace “stuff” where we can so that we can be more intentional in our programming. Again, this topic could be an article by itself, but I will cover that at another time.

Video 1. This video outlines one of the many faults you can find when analyzing the mechanical aspects of plyometrics. Something as simple as ankle stiffness can be the difference between quick, efficient ground striking and slow, prolonged ground contact times.

Running: Max Sprinting, Submax Sprinting, and Tempo Runs

This is fairly straightforward, but the balance seems to have been skewed somewhere along the way. Each aspect of running has its place in a training program and should be utilized based on the qualities you’re after. We have all heard the phrase “speed is king,” and programs have recently began shifting all of their attention in this direction. Maximal sprinting has great utility when athletes simply haven’t topped out their speedometers yet.

The concept of speed reserve is a powerful one, and raising the ceiling on maximum speed allows athletes to “cruise” in-game at submaximal speeds without the same cost of exertion as when they were slower. The higher you raise that ceiling, the faster the speeds you can sustain with less effort, which will then limit fatigue and improve repeat sprint ability in game.

The key to using max sprinting as a training modality is to chase not only the ability to obtain max speed, but also the ability to sustain it, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

The key to using max sprinting as a training modality is to chase not only the ability to obtain max speed, but also the ability to sustain it. Some good methods are to use variations of the 10-yard fly as well as the 30-yard fly to address both traits. Only addressing one of these traits does not always address the other, so setting aside time to do both is optimal.

Video 2. This is a 40-yard test given to one of my football athletes. The massive intent and desire to run fast times can at times cause athletes to overexert themselves and “tighten up” in an effort to run very fast. Sometimes, this motivation is enough to propel athletes to great performances; other times it may inhibit them.

If an athlete has suboptimal movement, chances are that max sprinting may not allow them to improve upon those qualities in a controlled manner. Because of that, you may utilize submax sprinting (~90-98% intensity) or even tempo runs (~70-80% intensity) to allow the athlete to home in on any new cues or skills they are trying to master. For submax sprinting (90-98% intensity) I choose not to time, as it changes the intent from movement economy to chasing times.

I personally find that video analysis is great to reinforce movements while tweaking insufficiencies as needed. The athlete shifts their perception of success from time to execution, and in my experience, the results they achieve seem to produce intrinsic feedback mechanisms that are similar to hitting personal bests. They’re excited to master or make progress in difficult concepts as they rewire lifelong movement habits that have been deeply programmed in their brains. It also allows them to focus on qualities such as speed endurance and special endurance that they may need, depending on the nuances of their respective sport.

You may find that athletes actually run faster when on a submax focus, as they allow themselves to relax and their movements become more fluid while sprinting, says @BrendanThompsn. Share on X

You may find that athletes actually run faster when on a submax focus, as they allow themselves to relax and their movements become more fluid while sprinting. It is interesting that even though we don’t typically make attempts at personal bests every day or even every week in the weight room but rather train submaximally, we still see the maxes go up on testing day. I think this often gets overlooked in sprinting in the idea that we can train below our personal bests regularly and intentionally while still having the potential to improve our max speed, speed endurance, and other important qualities in performance.

Video 3. Again, we see the use of initial video repetitions to identify mechanical faults that can then be corrected for with proper training approaches. Technical components of sprinting are more easily controlled in submax runs, as shown here.

As mentioned above, tempo running is great for focusing on the biomechanics of sprinting, but it is also useful in training comfortable rhythm, cadence, and pacing mechanisms. Pacing is the giveaway here, so we should use a timing device to ensure proper execution of this type of training. Tempo improves aerobic capacity and the ability to recover between sprints, as well the durability to repeat sprint and sustain performances when having to compete on back-to-back days.

There are also instances of athletes improving their max speeds and overall performances when getting a steady dose of tempo in their training. These instances are frequently argued as an athlete improving despite their training, while others are quick to say that it was because of their training. I believe, as always, that it depends on the context surrounding performance, and we should use that to lead the way on programming.

Autoregulation

Another way to use timing to inform training is through autoregulation, in which athletes continuously sprint and recover until their times begin to fall off x% from their baseline of the day. Doing so allows the athletes’ times to dictate the training dose for that day. Doing more reps beyond the drop-off point yields diminishing returns, as movement quality, muscle recruitment, and other important qualities drop off as well. Without timing, we are unable to determine this point, which could be the issue we see with the lack of timing systems in training environments, as coaches prescribe x amount of sprints no matter what and the athletes must get through it or face a harsh punishment of even more reps.

The Best of Both Worlds

The debate between endurance and max speed training seems to grace my timeline quite frequently. While each approach has its own pros and cons, I don’t think it is fair to say either is wrong, as there are heavily documented objective results supporting each method. Additionally, we need to understand that the instances of improvement under any of the above training methods do not serve as the rule, as there are often contextual circumstances left out. These include such factors as a multisport athlete versus a one-sport athlete, genetics, training age, and lifestyle choices, among other things that also play important roles in the way an athlete responds to a certain training stimulus.

Maximum intensity sprinting isn’t always ideal, just as overdosing on slow volume every day isn’t always ideal. While we cannot be certain whether a one-size-fits-all approach is out there, I think it is safe to pick and choose pieces of each to complement your program. I won’t stake a claim that this hybrid approach is the best, as I don’t think any approach has been found to always work for every athlete. However, I think it is safe to say that finding a balance between the two by alternating them in an A day (high-intensity) and B day (low-intensity) fashion may yield optimal and more well-rounded results, as you are getting the best of both worlds without ignoring any qualities that may exist between.

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 college sports, student athletes often see several strength and conditioning coaches cycled through every year. As a result, they can start to believe young strength coaches are only there in order to move up the ranks—particularly given the proximity in age. In order to achieve buy-in from the athletes, you have to convince them you care and are not just one more coach passing through.

When we look at any strong relationships in our life—our parents, friends, coworkers, classmates—what are the similarities? We give complete trust to those individuals, would probably sacrifice the only hour break we had in a 12-hour day just to make them feel at ease, would listen if they gave us career advice, and would trust they are looking out for our best interests. So why would that connection be any different between a coach and a student athlete?

Earn Their Trust

When I was 22 and entered the professional world of strength and conditioning, one thing I immediately noticed was that if you don’t have an age difference, bigger muscles, or a more successful athletic career, some athletes may think you don’t have anything to offer them besides time. For the most part, if you show them respect, they will show it right back. There may be a group of guys that will test your patience, but keep being consistent and showing you will not give up on making them better; if they are not for the program, then they will weed themselves out. Like the quote says, “Lower the bar and you lose the winners. Raise the bar and you’ll lose the losers.”

In order for an athlete to trust your program and buy into it, they have to respect your professionalism and know that what you are doing is going to benefit them. The best recipe for coaching is confidence—believe in your program, trust every second that you put into becoming a better coach, and project excitement to the athletes that these exercises are going to change how they play the game. They might go ahead and put some faith in your program and end up being a better athlete because of it. But don’t be fooled: they can spot a phony from a distance. Make sure you’re honest with who you are to them and be as open as you can be. If you are not a vocal, aggressive coach, don’t play that role, because once you lose that trust, it is hard to gain back. People respect honesty and transparency.

If you are not a vocal, aggressive coach, don’t play that role, because once you lose that trust, it is hard to gain back. People respect honesty and transparency, says @CoachKeemz. Share on X

If you want athletes to perform with intent and energy, they have to know you want them to succeed as much as they do themselves. One problem you may come across is student athletes who have had bad experiences with a performance coach in high school and now believe the negative stereotypes about strength coaches: that they are uneducated meatheads, they frequently injure athletes, and are just there to scream and cash a paycheck because they couldn’t succeed elsewhere.

So how do you resolve these types of trust issues with athletes? You show them how you are different from that coach who left a bad impression because you won’t give up on them, and you keep your positive energy consistent. The day you switch up who you are, the athletes will notice and look at you differently. There’s not a class or certification that teaches you how to be a “people person,” but it’s important to ask your athletes questions to learn who they are, what they want to do, what kind of family they come from, and so on.

A general “How are classes going?” or “How was your week?” can go a long way. Many student athletes are away from their family and friends and have no one to have real face-to-face conversations with, so it is nice for them to connect with the people they see the most: their strength coaches.

‘How are classes going?’ or ‘How was your week?’ can go a long way. Many student athletes are away from their family and friends and have no one to have real face-to-face conversations with, says @CoachKeemz. Share on X

Early on in my coaching career, I saw coaches I looked up to like Andreu Swasey in the weight room working out in the mornings before any athletes showed up—practicing what they preach and demonstrating the work ethic to wake up even earlier than the athletes in order to get their lift in. I also had coaches like Chad Smith, who would go through the workout routines and make his graduate assistants and interns join him in order to understand what the athletes would be feeling. This was powerful because coaches should always understand what the athletes are enduring and if adjustments need to be made. Thomas Carroll, one of my biggest influences, always preached, “Doesn’t matter how much work it is, do what’s best for the athletes.” He is a coach that treats his athletes like family and understands that it is not always going to be rainbows and butterflies, but will go out of his way to ensure both the athletes and the coaching staff are doing their best to succeed (and not just in their sport, but preparing for the real world, too).

Communicate with a Purpose

Another thing I’ve learned is that in the first couple weeks in a new institution, it’s good to try to reinforce the culture set by the sport coach and be a direct extension of them. I usually observe the overall response to their coaching tactics; knowing your athletes is an important aspect in coaching, because you want them to respond appropriately to your instruction. Vernacular is also crucial: talking the same language is important when you’re building a culture, and everyone has to be on the same page. If the head strength coach calls an exercise a “front elbow bridge” then do not go and call it a “plank.”

Talking the same language is important when you’re building a culture, and everyone has to be on the same page. If the head strength coach calls an exercise a *front elbow bridge* then do not go and call it a *plank,* says @CoachKeemz. Share on X

Reinforce the coaches’ main messages and be an extra voice saying the same things. Once the athletes know who you are and what your goals are in the program, they will respect your hustle and be comfortable accepting coaching demands from you. Many athletes have seen my own transformation in parallel with theirs: I came in to Florida International University weighing in at around 175 pounds, and just five months later was up to nearly 195; after dropping back to 185 pounds, at North Carolina Central University that’s risen up to about 215 pounds in the span of a year. The athletes at NCCU have also seen a corresponding change of strength as I’ve been able to add at least 50 pounds to my max in my back squat, deadlifts, bench, and clean by applying consistent work throughout the first seven months of my time there.

The best part is being able to show them the translation of strength into sport—my sprint times went down, my vertical went up, and my endurance dramatically increased. These changes showed the athletes that I was giving the same effort and consistency I demanded from them, and was seeing the kinds of results they wanted to see. There will be times where you will need to demonstrate exercises and shock some athletes. You may be put in situations where your athletic abilities need to be showcased, like a pickup game of basketball, a timed speed drill, or a competition with coaches—so be prepared for it all.

When demonstrating exercises, I have noticed during lifts if you mention how the exercises carry over to the field, athletes will perform them with greater intent. For example, if we are focusing on the triple extension of an Olympic lift, we might mention how this triple extension is always done when we jump, cut, or run and that might just be enough for them to push through as hard as they can. To scream at an athlete just because they fail to understand or execute might be a direct result of inadequate coaching, so instead of getting frustrated, try to explain the exercise in the way it would make sense to a young individual (because, after all, that’s what they are).

While coaching, bring that energy and show that you enjoy the job because energy is contagious. Nobody wants to be in a room moving any type of weight fast and have a silent coach stare at them with a poker face; even if it’s just a hop around the room with excitement or a “good job,” make sure you’re acknowledging the good consistent work you want to see.

Managing a Team

If you’ve been assigned your own sport team to coach, take advantage of it. Meet with the sport coach and have a needs analysis and annual plan to present, show them you know what you’re doing, and have something set in place to help while at the same time keeping an open mind to hear the needs of the coach. Once the training begins, keep the coaches updated with attendance, performance reviews, imbalances that you notice, special focuses you feel are needed to enhance an athlete’s performance, and anything you feel is important. You do not have to report every single thing to the sport coach, but keep in contact. If there is an assistant coach, contact them first because chances are the head sport coaches are much busier.

In order to get the performances you want from the athletes, it’s the little things that matter. Coach Jack Sprague and Mason Mathews told me to always meet the athletes halfway—to get what you want, give the athletes some of what they want. If a basketball player is squatting for force production, maybe plan some plyometrics to go with that because what basketball player doesn’t like to have more bounce? Just remember to implement it at the right time. Finishing the week with a good arm pump is something basketball players enjoy, especially since their jerseys don’t have sleeves. The confidence they get from feeling good in their uniform could transfer over to the court. Tracking progress data and/or pictures is another good way to show the coaches and athletes that improvements are being made and give them an extra boost of confidence in what you’re doing. These can also serve as a testimonial in case you have any future interviews as a strength coach.

Feel Free to Brag a Little

Athletes love a good story, especially if that story includes individuals they admire or activities they can relate to. Having something in common is a great way to build a relationship with trust. If you’ve had firsthand involvement in individual or team success, mention it. It can be as simple as relating something like, “I shadowed one of my favorite strength coaches as he trained Michael Thomas, and when they did these sprint drills Thomas saw an instant change to his sprint technique.” This field is one where you have to be a good salesman, so make sure you are able to use every resource in order to get your athletes to buy in.

Continued personal development is an effective way to bring something new to the table. One time during 6 AM lifts, I noticed a number of tired athletes, with many complaining about a lack of sleep and how tough the workouts were. I responded by describing two different studies that show the effect of hydration and sleep on exercise, and how if you lack either, exercise will feel harder than it might otherwise and also increase risk of injury.

Upon a couple changes recommended to these athletes, they acknowledged the fact that it might be on them to fix certain patterns—and soon enough, their energy levels increased and they began educating other players, creating a great culture amongst the team. It showed how being prepared and doing the little things in life can have such a big impact in the grand scheme. Even a minor tip from you as a strength coach matters, and could be what these individuals use to guide their lives and achieve greatness in their future pursuits.

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

You are an impostor. Don’t be offended, as we are all impostors. Think of one of the main reasons you became a coach. Was it because of business you didn’t finish in your athletic career? Did you start to prove there was a better way than that of some former coach you really disliked? Is it something you do because of the pull to stay in the sport after immense success as an athlete?

We all come to coaching for different reasons, but what most of us have in common is that we will face impostor syndrome at some point in our career. Most of us thought we knew it all or were desperate for someone to give us a cookie-cutter system that magically produced results. If we coach long enough, we will likely be guilty of both.

As we get better as coaches, it becomes abundantly clear how little we actually know. Interestingly, as we come to grips with this phenomenon, we often become better coaches in the process. Share on X

Our development also leads us to apologize to our earliest teams because they are often our guinea pigs. As we get better, it becomes abundantly clear how little we actually know. Interestingly, as we come to grips with this phenomenon, we often become better coaches in the process. As we become more self-aware, there tends to be the emotional creep of impostor syndrome.

Impostor syndrome (also known as impostor phenomenon, impostorism, fraud syndrome, or the impostor experience) is a psychological pattern in which one doubts one’s accomplishments and has a persistent internalized fear of being exposed as a “fraud.”

The good news is that imposter syndrome can lead to positive things. People who don’t feel entirely comfortable with the fear of being a fraud can be highly motivated. We want to live up to the privilege, title, and status that comes from being seen as an expert in the field. However, it is very natural for us to be psychologically in flux about how much of an impostor we really are.

So, how do you determine whether you are or are not a good coach? Is it because you win, have a large team, are respected by your peers, and/or your team has excellent social cohesion? How do you measure those things? Is it just your anecdotal knowledge and experience, or is it because everyone tells you how great you are all the time? As high as those “measurements” can be for us as coaches, do we really want to know the truth? Can we handle the truth?

The Truth Through Science

The scientific method can provide us with the path to know if we are genuinely doing a GOOD job. Some of us who aren’t enlightened might ignore science because it doesn’t fit our world view, or it might point to an inconvenient truth about our place in that world. Are we a net positive, do we deserve the credit we get, or as practitioners of sport are we prescribing the best methods for the athletes we coach?

What do we need to engage in the practice of the scientific method? Hypothesis, findings, discussion (self-reflection), peer review, and further research that eventually corroborates previous findings. Out of all of this, we find emergent truth. The most fantastic thing about emergent truth is that it doesn’t care if you believe in it—it’s just true. One emergent truth all coaches want to know is: Am I good or am I an impostor?

In comparison to other sports, track and field is one of the most objectively measurable athletic pursuits. In other words, it’s a sport where we can see the direct improvement or decline of an individual’s performance regularly. Improved performance is an important variable for measuring the success of our program.

A Hypothesis Through Training Design

Coaches have been smitten with different training philosophies and methods for decades—e.g., Feed the Cats, short to long, the Baylor method, concurrent, and critical mass systems. We often implement these training ideas because we hypothesize that they will make our program better or a group of individuals in our program better. We implement a new drill, workout, lift, or psychological intervention, and we hope to see an improved result through performance.

It is important to note that our hypothesis should not be a shot in the dark or try to reinvent the wheel. Often coaches ignore good science, research, data, and methods. Interpretation can quickly become flawed if we change too many variables. Sports scientists like Bondarchuk, Verkhoshansky, and Morin, and coaches like Pfaff, Anderson, Hurst, Hart, Francis, and Burris have created clear paths to success worthy of exploration. A coach’s hypothesis is only as valid as their commitment to the entire experiment—that is, the track and field season. Once the season finishes up, you get your findings.

 

Our Findings Through Data

As track and field coaches, we use our findings to determine whether our hypothesis was correct and if it had the results we wanted to see via improved performance for an individual athlete or group of athletes. Additionally, we must also consider in our findings not just how many people improved, but also how many people completed the season without injury or quitting the team. The hierarchy of data should be competitive performance, testing performance, injury rate, and retention. Track and field provides continual data to compare and contrast previous individual performances. Thankfully, due to databases like milesplit.com and athletic.net, we can discern where our training is taking our athletes in competition.

I chart all of my athletes’ performances to track trends during competition. When tracked, a program must show positive returns with elite and average athletes. If your system covers the needs of the sport and the stimulus, you should expect to see these patterns appear each season as the athlete cycles through your program. Progress is significant, and all your athletes should trend toward improvement without any extreme setbacks.

If you coach boys, it is slightly more challenging to dissect progress or chart how useful your program is. Almost all boys get better with maturity from the overload of testosterone. To get a clearer picture through the fog of male maturity, it would be wise to crunch your athlete’s data with other athletes in the area. After about five years, you will be able to see the percentages of improvement. You will be better able to figure out if your athletes are improving at a higher rate than your competition.

For female track athletes, it’s easier to make sense of the data. With girls, these gains are harder to come by because they typically mature sooner and don’t benefit from the same increase of testosterone once they reach high school. Thus, if your female athletes improve throughout their time in high school, you can statistically say with great confidence that your program is net positive over natural maturity.

Another essential tool is to compare the average of the entire event crew (sprints) to the top individual performer. Since 2008, most of our state’s top track and field performers have had the majority of their competitions fed into a database on mo.milesplt.com. The database also allows you to trace the statistics of your sprint and distance crew compared to other high school programs. Information can be displayed by conference, region, class, statewide, and nationwide. The data is crunched and scored just like a traditional cross-country team but with the track events (figures 5 and 6).

If you are around long enough, you will coach a good athlete. The question is, does that talented athlete improve? What about building a stable of gifted athletes? As alluring as those individuals can be, we should be more interested in depth.

Crunching the data often reveals that a team that ranks the highest isn’t due to their best kid but to the group as a whole. In our most recent season, I was blessed to have a great year in terms of depth. We were in the top 2 for all three sprints as a team. In the state of Missouri there are approximately 500 schools that participate in track and field, separated into five classifications. My school’s enrollment typically falls around the 80th largest, which puts us in the second classification.

Every year I use the data breakdown to measure what we are doing as a program against my peers. One of my annual goals is to finish the season in the top 20 rankings as a team in the 100-, 200-, and 400-meter dash. Using this as a measuring tool allows us to maintain competitiveness year after year, and also makes sure we are a well-rounded sprint program.

Competitive data is the highest standard in data. Testing has its place and committing practice time to a 45-second run, a standing long jump, power clean, or gauntlet 20-meter fly with a Freelap timing system has value. I’ve written for SimpliFaster before about my thoughts on the importance of electronic timing. However, most of the value is in the athlete versus themselves or the program to itself. Comparing the growth of the individual and raising the floor of the entire program are equally important for a coach to self-evaluate their positive impact across all levels of talent.

The most meaningful data is how much our athletes improve in competition, says @SprintersCompen. Share on X

Comparing your data outside of competition to other programs has very little value. Testing mostly helps to inform what could be the reason for a lackluster performance or competitive cycle. Typically, we have several athletes who do not test well but perform great on the day of a meet. The opposite is also true for other athletes in our programs. Thus, the most meaningful data is how much our athletes improve in competition.

 

Discuss, Ponder, and Reflect

When we reach the “discussion” part of our experiment, it is vital for us to ask another question: How do we know we have the athlete in the proper event? Again, testing over a variety of skills and biomotor abilities is critical. It is essential to have many tests to evaluate the athletes who are new to our programs as they join our team for the first time. Frequent and annual testing allow our returning athletes to display new skills or levels of fitness. The data leads our returning athletes to train and compete refreshed with the prospect of new opportunities ahead.

A good coach will take the data acquired and cross-reference it with previous testing periods and seasons. This process helps us design new training and improve training loads. We will also be more adept at placing the athlete with the correct training group or track and field event. Over time, a growing catalog of data shows us what training protocol will increase an athlete’s chance of achieving elite status.

In my program I have found, without a doubt, that a flying 30-meter has a strong correlation to success on the track. However, I would caution against coaches only hanging their hats on maximal velocity tests. Good coaches use a variety of criteria for talent identification and steering subsequent training sessions.

A recent epic conversation I had with Jimson Lee serves as an excellent primer on my testing protocol and what I do. During the season, the athletes reveal themselves through their performances in response to competition and how they adapt to the training stimulus.

It is also essential to change the event menu for athletes in your program. Rotating events accomplishes two things:

 

1. 1. It allows athletes to compete in different events,

 

1. 1. It enables us to figure out the best event for athletes as we reach the precipice of the championship season.

 

Another tool I use to figure out if I have trained the athlete correctly and what might be their strongest event is this performance calculator (figure 7). If athletes have a better performance in an event than the one they believe is their best event, a good coach will make an adjustment. It’s in their best interest to train them in the event they are ranked highest in, in the state, region, or locality, respectively.

Additionally, if we want to know we are doing a good job, the three nearest performance predictions should be close to what an athlete can achieve in competition. If an athlete’s performance doesn’t come close in the three events they frequently train for, there is a problem. The issue is they are in the wrong event or they’re getting improper training. Worse, it could be a combination of the two.

Typically, it takes about five years to know with some certainty what problems and strengths are a direct result of a coach’s actions, says @SprintersCompen. Share on X

If you are new to coaching or starting a new program without a database of testing and performance outcomes, it won’t be easy initially. A lack of data is one of the many issues that stand in the way of a program getting off the ground. Typically, it takes about five years to know with some certainty what problems and strengths are a direct result of a coach’s actions. In the beginning, it will be critical to glean knowledge from a trusted, successful coach with a system that safely addresses performance potential. To increase our chances of success out of the gate, the mentor chosen should coach in a similar school.

Sport’s Science Considerations

A coach’s intuition should be the hands on the wheel, but science should be the guardrails. Remember, Mother Nature doesn’t care very much what you think or what your plan is. To maximize our efforts, we need to understand the raw materials we will work with through our careers. David Epstein’s acclaimed book, The Sports Gene, dove deep into the ACTN3 gene and its role with elite sports performance. It found a robust link when contrasting the difference in performance potential between CC/CT and TT versions of the ACTN3 gene concerning speed/power athletes. The personal genetic company 23andme has researched the ACTN3 gene in the people who are members of their service.

When looking at the two types of speed-power athletes, in all but one group nearly 50% of the athletes who have potential in power events are a mix of speed and endurance versus speed exclusively. In the absence of a genetic test, it might be unclear where we should start our athlete’s training. Extrapolating data from 23andme lends credence to those of us in the track and field community who are prudently starting our initial training in the middle of the event menu with a 400-meter centric program. Couple our gut feeling with the common genetic dispositions of athletes, targeted testing, and a rotation of competitive outputs, and we will have a clear picture over time what training should be for our athletes. Throughout a couple of months, these factors will reveal what tendencies we should train to maximize a competitor’s performance at that point in their training age.

To be considered a good coach, once those tendencies are clear we need to have a personal discussion on what is the best way to maximize performance for our athlete(s). Russian coach and sports scientist Dr. Anatoli Bondarchuk has done a lot of research on what we should be doing in practice. His set of books, The Transfer of Training, is considered a seminal work on the subject of training stimulus and its effects on human performance.

In the first volume, Dr. Bondarchuk covered a vast array of training and its implication on sport’s readiness. His research studied the effects of specific sports conditioning and ancillary training methods. The emerging truth that came out of his data is that the stimulus that most reflects the actual sport has the highest correlation of improvement to the actual sports performance. The information on top or bottom shows the relationship for elite and sub-elite sprinters, respectively.

For example, in figure 8 below, you can see the best training stimulus is an interval just below or above (100 meters and 300 meters) the race length for an elite female 200-meter sprinter, allowing the athlete to be a little more aggressive/fast short of the distance or stoic/enduring over the race distance. Thus, we need to train maximal velocity for absolute speed. Meanwhile, in the athlete’s best event, we ALSO need to train longer intervals to maximize output for both ends of the race.

Another aspect of Dr. Bondarchuk’s work is ancillary exercises that can synergistically work with the vital training stimulus to improve the sprinter. Especially as an athlete progresses, it becomes abundantly clear that the critical skill of being able to move quickly requires elasticity. One of the best ways to improve an athlete’s “bounce” is through plyometric movements like repeat bounding. Shown below in figure 9, jump training has the highest correlation to improved sports performance as a supplementary training tool for sprinters.

Conversely, in some cases we can choose a training stimulus that can negatively affect our athletes or, at best, is half as effective as other stimuli. For us to do a “good” job, we must be careful about what we choose to do and certainly with whom we do it. Based on our testing, our data, and suggested training load (figure 10). We must put it all together so we can feel less like a fraud or an impostor and more like we are net positive for our athletes.

Once we know what to do, it becomes crucial to understand how to do it. For example, creating a training session for sprinters, we must select the right pace and recoveries for the distance we want to train. Messing up these key training parameters could ruin an athlete’s practice or worse. The book RunningTrax (no longer in print) is excellent for assisting you as a coach to select the right distances and intensities. (For another option, I suggest picking up Dylan Hicks’ track & field planner program.) Figure 11 shows a sample of training for what is typically the performance level of a high school All-American.

We can now select the proper training based on the number of intervals suggested from the Transfer of Training with accurate intensities based on that repetition volume. A good coach also breaks down the different aspects of training by modeling the event’s various actual elements. In track and field, we must cue the different parts of the competitive whole.

A good coach breaks down the different aspects of training by modeling the event’s various actual elements, says @SprintersCompen. Share on X

Race modeling is an effective strategy. We give athletes visuals through the landmarks (figure 12) and verbal cues as they reach the locations on the track. Good coaching uses science to identify where to place, train, and produce repeated performances that result in their team being steps ahead of their competitive peers annually.

 

Video 1. A video of me race modeling with my athletes.

Peer Review

Next is possibly the most essential aspect of the scientific method as it applies to proper coaching—peer review. The review requires asking several questions about our training:

 

• • Do you coach boys or girls?

 

• • Do you have an indoor track?

 

• • Do you have an indoor track and field season?

 

• • How does your school size play a role in comparison to your opponent?

 

• • How competitive is your region?

 

• • Do you qualify for championships by performance or placement?

 

• • Do you coach multiple sports at the school?

 

• • Do you coach XC?

 

• • What’s the diversity of your population?

 

• • Do you have an outdoor track?

 

• • What’s the weather traditionally in your region?

 

• • Are you allowed to condition freely in the off-seasons?

 

We can quickly see how the review of our program can become immense. Instead of getting bogged down in an endless stream of questions, I suggest we choose a different route. Here is a strategy that I have employed to break through the noise that peer review can be. It’s called the “Wooden Project.”

As many of us know, the former UCLA men’s basketball coach, John Wooden, is regarded as one of the greatest coaches in any sport. A large number of books have been written on his time as a coach and his methods. We all know of his leadership pyramid, but what struck me was his willingness to never stop searching and sharing with experts in the field. Every off-season, Coach Wooden targeted a part of his game that “needed work.” He searched out experts in that particular aspect of basketball.

In the book, You Haven’t Taught Until They Have Learned: John Wooden’s Teaching Principles and Practices, the author and former athlete describes the process in detail. Coach Wooden would research who were the experts in something like free throw shooting. He would then send out a survey to those coaches with a series of questions on training design, mental prep, strategy, technique, coaching, cues, etc. for how they attack teaching the skill of free-throw shooting.

The genius behind this isn’t just the information gleaned but also the collaborative effort through peer review. Not only do the answers from the master coaches go to Coach Wooden, but also among all the participants! When finished, he would send the survey with its 10 answers to all 10 coaches who participated. They would get to see and share in everyone else’s answers, thus becoming a better coach based on the advice of the other experts. Every time Wooden did this, his circle of expert coaches, coming from all sports levels, expanded.

Locally, my friends and I have created a coaches’ circle that meets once a month. We rotate houses for BBQ, training talk, and even a book club for our professional development as leaders. Reading Wooden’s book awakened me to the possibility of creating an international circle of experts who could help me “peer review my methods.”

Through the connections I made from Carl Valle and from Mike Young’s website elitetrack.com, I was able to start what Coach Wooden had done decades earlier but now for track and field. Within the first couple of months, the participating coaches got hundreds of pages of responses on various subjects in the sport of track and field. We all became better, and it inspired me to write my treatise on speed: The Sprinter’s Compendium. My purpose was not to share a system that all fundamentalists must follow. Instead, I wanted to pull in experts in different levels of the sport around the world to help young and experienced coaches alike continue to get better.

Compendium: A compendium is a concise collection of information pertaining to a body of knowledge. A compendium may summarize a larger work. In most cases the body of knowledge will concern a specific field of human interest or endeavor.

The resulting compendium was a raw 763-page monster on the subject of speed. Later, I was asked to give my review of different coaches, their methods, and how I knew they were doing a “good job.” As you would expect, methods varied widely. I was lucky to get several, great, abundance-mindset coaches willing to share and critique different methods. Coaches like Tony Wells (Adapt or Die), Tony Holler (Feed the Cats), Mike Hurst (Concurrent), Sean Burris (Critical Mass System), and Dan Pfaff (Flow State) all contributed immensely to the process.

I’m often asked, “who do you think was the best coach or training system?” My response has often been, “it all depends.” However, I have pondered over the years that this might not be the best response. Not because I am trying to avoid being snarky or keep from offending people. On the contrary, the best coaches must adapt to their environment to bring their hard-fought experiences to bear in conjunction with continually evolving sports science to institute best training methods.

However, all of that can only happen if you know the fundamental principles of the event and the sound science that supports it. As coaches, to stay ahead of the curve we must evolve. Not because kids, biological necessities, or human anatomy are different. We must grow because it requires us to continue to get better so we can “do a good job.”

One of the arguments I faced recently in a debate with Tony Holler was that my system is too complex and thus unwieldy for most coaches. My response at this point is that our athletes demand that we get better. Greatness requires effort, time, inspiration, and eventually, innovation. There is no shame in having a starting point, and then cutting and pasting training that is simple.

When I spoke at ALTIS a few winters ago, I argued you must be a master of different methods before you can become a “flow state” coach like Dan Pfaff. In math, before you can do calculus, you must know your multiplication tables; before you can multiply, you need to be able to add. Eventually, what we do might seem very complicated or sophisticated, and often that can be intimidating. It is our job to demystify it for others and show them the path.

So, Have You Answered the Question Yet? Are You a Good Coach?

Here is an interesting dichotomy. If you answered 100% yes that you are a good coach, you have lost your way or haven’t even started your journey as a practitioner of sport. Conversely, some of you might now feel like a fraud. Good news! You and I can get better. There is no such thing as a perfect system. As Dan Pfaff said a long time ago for the Canadian Coaches Centre Podcast: “A perfect system is a weak system because it can be broken easily. Instead what we want to create is a robust system.”

A robust training system will adapt to pressures known and unknown. It will respond…by producing repeatable, consistent, and high-performance results, says @SprintersCompen. Share on X

A robust system will adapt to pressures known and unknown. It will respond in kind to the forces trying to destroy it by producing repeatable, consistent, and high-performance results. To do this, avoid becoming a fraud, test new training hypotheses frequently, gather your data, reflect on your results, and have them peer reviewed. Our athletes, peers, and mentors deserve our commitment to a growth mindset as we engage in the never-ending pursuit of becoming a good coach.

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

After a recent SimpliFaster blog post of mine was published on prancing and galloping, I received a few messages and comments that made me pause and reflect on my own coaching style.

“Coach, how do you get your athletes to be motivated to and take doing drills seriously?”

I was pleasantly surprised that most of the feedback wasn’t from the anti-drill and “specificity only” crowd, but rather from coaches saying that they want to do this stuff but are having a hard time getting started. I understand that selling things like skips, crawls, gallops, and prancing to teenage football players may take something of a cultural shift, but this doesn’t mean it is impossible or something to avoid because of initial awkwardness.

I did get a few tags on Twitter with the comments linking a GIF or video of the famous “Prancercise” lady. I actually got a chuckle out of them because it shows how easily the look of a drill can turn a coach off, even if the function has tremendous value.

The fact is that whenever you introduce something new during a season, you are bound to get some quizzical looks and kids who pipe up and say something along the lines of “We don’t usually do this” or ask the dreaded question, “Why are we doing this?”

I am a huge advocate for drills for several reasons, all of which I will explain here in this article. As I spoke about in a previous blog piece, the research says drills work—they just don’t always work right away or in the way we hope they do.

Bosch lovers and followers of the dynamic systems theory are well-versed in using variations to further ingrain good patterns and solutions in athletes. Below, I offer advice that will give coaches confidence and present seven key methods for implementing drills beyond the speed ladder variety to create buy-in with their athletes.

1. Make Time for Drills Daily

Doing drills sporadically is one way to ensure that no one ever takes them seriously. Drills are a focus lesson in the same way that most classrooms start off with a small lesson. Doing them inconsistently is confusing and frustrating for developing athletes, and it becomes harder for a coach to calibrate drills to meet the needs of the athletes in front of them that day. Coaches and athletes both will improve their respective crafts and have some sort of expectations on different tasks.

There isn’t much instant gratification in long-term athletic development…but I think the length of time it takes to saturate an athlete with this is greatly underestimated, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

There is not much instant gratification in long-term athletic development. It is really a long-haul type of endeavor. The descriptor “long-term” precedes “athletic development” but I think the length of time it takes to saturate an athlete with this is greatly underestimated. Drilling great movement is not something to throw your hands up at and proclaim, “Well, that didn’t work” after eight weeks.

Coach Mike Whiteman of the Pittsburgh Riverhounds Soccer Club routinely posts videos of excellent training montages of his athletes. His response when asked how he gets his athletes moving so well made me nod my head. What did he say? We slow-cook everything.

Specificity is much easier with a solid foundation of movement.

In a recent webinar, Coach Ryan Banta remarked that it takes about 500 hours for motor learning to really stick and for the athletes to be rewired via neuroplasticity. This kind of long-term development becomes harder when we skip daily coaching opportunities. Most of my coaching failures have happened simply because I sent mixed signals by not being consistent with training modalities.

The drill/warm-up sessions I lead are the one time that all athletes, regardless of event (or in the case of field sports, positions), are all together as a unit. There is something to be said for that cohesive environment and setting the tone for the day with clear and common language.

2. Start Small and Select Carefully

Most coaches I talk to are overwhelmed by the sheer number of drill possibilities. They want to know that they are doing the right thing. I am commonly asked, “What are the best sprint drills to improve speed?” My answer is usually none of them and all of them.

This is not meant to be cryptic. Drills are about creating a more complete athlete rather than just creating changes in peak velocity. Speed, like strength, cannot be maximized in the presence of dysfunction and a general lack of movement competency. We must simply aim to get our athletes to do as many movements as well as we can and build them brick by brick.

Coaches need not experience paralysis by analysis. Rather than searching for the mythical perfect drill, remember who you are coaching and understand that going slow is perfectly okay. By the same token, something too challenging is easily scaled back.

Rather than searching for the mythical perfect drill, remember who you are coaching and understand that going slow is perfectly okay, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

Sprinting is commonly upheld as the pinnacle of athletic performance, and indeed, the posture, rhythm, timing, coordination, and elasticity that is on display in good sprinters makes us stop and marvel. However, if we inherit athletes who possess some speed but lack the ability to perform movements like skipping, prancing, galloping, etc. with the aforementioned qualities, we can move forward by addressing this low-hanging fruit in conjunction with smart sprint training.

It seems impossible to me that an athlete who lacks general movement ability and/or experience will suddenly be a sprinter who displays “maximum beauty” or a clean block start. They have no awareness of what the best of something feels like.

The hardest part is getting started, but just start. Start at the bottom. Start with 10 minutes. Tony Holler has a list of 10 speed drills in his “Feed the Cats” program. He says he coaches the heck out of the drills and wants them done in a “caffeinated” state.

One of my favorites to start with is the “loose skip.” I often note with our jumps coach, Tyler Colbert, that the loose skip is a good eye test on day one of a new season. It is such a simple movement, but it is not uncommon to discover that a sizable chunk of the newcomers cannot perform a loose skip or basic crawl competently. Loose skips and marches are merely the upright version of a crawl.

It may also be worthwhile to explore a drill or movement deeply in one session. For example, I may decide during the “movement” portion of our warm-up to go skip heavy (examples of skipping variations will come in the next section). If I notice that we are having issues with galloping, we will go gallop heavy, and so on. Maybe it is baby bounds, prancing, A-runs—address what is needed.

This summer has given me a good chance to continue using drills thematically. When we have an acceleration day, we tend to go skip heavy. On longer, rhythmic days, gallops, and on top speed days, prancing.

There is no perfect progress, but if it is early in the season, you can start with the most remedial of a variety of drills. Teach a proper march, crawl, loose skip, and basic gallop, and start prancing progressions. The goal is to constantly revisit and repeat things, attack weaknesses, and forge ahead. Four years from now, the scene in the rear-view mirror should look pretty good.

3. Allow Athletes to Repeat Stuff and Sprinkle in Movement Variability

When I first laid a foundation of movement with our track team, I had very few drills. Then I added more. Then I cut out the fluff and stopped trying to do more and focused instead on what I thought was important. It really is about meeting the athletes where they are and then pushing them farther and farther in their abilities each week.

Kids like doing things they are good at, but they also like some unpredictable variety. Too much can turn a practice into a circus really quickly. Most drills can be tweaked slightly to create an illusion of shiny newness. This repetition without repetition keeps motivation high. More importantly, it also allows athletes to experience singular movements in a variety of ways and ultimately figure out what feels the best and how they may use it in the future. I want them to take what is useful and discard what isn’t.

Most drills can be tweaked slightly to create an illusion of shiny newness. This repetition without repetition keeps motivation high, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

For example, the Mach A-skip is commonly cast aside due to its perceived lack of specificity and transfer. I am under no illusion that an A-skip will create a world record holder, but if an athlete can’t A-skip, I ask myself “Why not? What is preventing them from doing this drill correctly?” It could be posture; it could be their foot strike. I want them to feel the flow and rhythm when they do this drill correctly, because if they cannot problem-solve and optimize something at 2-3 m/s, I bet their speed at 8-10 m/s is not optimal either. There is a best way that each athlete can perform an A-skip. It comes down to trying to do everything.

There are so many different types of skips that allow rehearsals of rhythm and timing. Here are some skipping options:

• Loose skip
• Skip for distance
• Skip for height
• A-skip for rhythm
• A-skip for speed
• B-skip
• C-skip
• Big arm side skip
• Asymmetrical skip
• Single leg A-skip
• Quick skip
• Skip bleeds (seamlessly transitioning from one type of skip to another)
• Backward skip on all variations

Nearly every drill has endless possibilities.

4. Don’t Call It a Warm-Up

I usually start a session by saying “Let’s get going” and gradually building the intensity near the main session. I don’t necessarily call anything a “warm-up.”

In a recent SimpliFaster article, Keith Ferrara discusses how he calls warm-ups “ignition series.” I can see the value in using this term or something similar with teams like football. The terminology definitely sounds more appealing than “warm-up drills.”

Especially for a coach beginning to make their foray into drilling and movement, having a unique name for their warm-up can highlight the importance of this portion of practice. This can also create a departure from the idea of warming up as merely stretching and jogging.

Some drills done well will “ignite” the team and pay dividends down the road in their development.

5. Spotlight Good Movement

My #1 goal on all drills is for the athletes to look as athletic as possible on any given day. I typically use the correct-incorrect-correct from John Wooden.

1. Correct: “Here’s what the drill is, here is what you should be feeling, and here is an analogy or cue that could help you.” Really sell the “why” in kid-friendly terms. Examples:

   • A-skip = “We are doing this to rehearse rhythm, slight forward lean, and great foot contacts.”
   • Carioca = “We are doing this to be fluid with our hips. Athletes need to be able to separate their lower and upper body when reacting on the field.”

2. Incorrect: “Don’t do this. Doing this is not a good thing because ________.” I then demonstrate it poorly. I tend to exaggerate, which eases the tension because no one will do it as poorly as this.
3. Correct: Find a kid who can do it really well, gas them up with confidence by having the team watch their model, and follow up with a round of applause. As the rest of the team goes, I circulate and assist with kids who need tweaks. If a kid has a breakthrough, I try to point that out as well. This is all a little cheesy, but it suits my coaching style, which borders on hyper at times. Their progress, however small, needs to be contagious.

There is not enough time to do this on every drill, of course. It depends where we are at. I usually consider what most of my athletes cannot do well and make it a goal for them to do it better.

The learning process is often slow, so drills may be done incorrectly all the time. This is fine, as long as the intent to be correct is high. Athletes need a lot of movement competency in their arsenal. Again, the more, the better.

6. Do Some Drills with Them

I won’t spend too much time on this section since coaches have different levels of comfort and readiness that they need to explore for themselves. I am seeing a growing trend of high school coaches immersing themselves in their own speed/drill training. Coaches like Mike Whiteman, Tyler Germain, Kyle Edwards, Tony Martins, and Joshua Collins all have posted their own training for their athletes to see.

I think it helps the kids to see a coach demonstrate something and be part of the process. It has personally helped me to take information from books and articles on certain movements and perform them with fidelity the way they were intended. This has allowed me to give live demos for the athletes, and if I cannot do the movement that well, I remark on how I am still learning it and explain what I would fix.

This doesn’t mean coaches need to do every drill, or any drill, but I can say first-hand that doing drills with our team has helped buy-in. My hope is that my athletes see my demo and are open-minded. If the old guy in front of them can do it, then so can they.

While not entirely necessary, being able to demo occasionally and show a willingness to learn is another tool for the coaching bag, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

My #1 rule for myself is to never have my athletes do something that I can’t do myself or at least explain really well. There are often days I have dress pants and boots on and never do a drill.

An added bonus is that drills are often low on the plyometric continuum and can reawaken the inner athlete in us coaches. I firmly believe that as we get older, we stop moving athletically, which can cause sarcopenia, reduce muscle power, and increase the risk of serious injuries like hip fractures. This is supported by some research.

While not entirely necessary, being able to demo occasionally and show a willingness to learn is another tool for the coaching bag.

7. Make Sure This Stuff Doesn’t Exist in a Vacuum

Another easy way to create buy-in on drills is through the use of social media. Unfortunately, the training from professional athletes that gets retweeted or posted on Instagram stories for various exercises can border on circus acts. This snapshot of training may be fun or motivational for these high-level athletes, but it is not the whole picture.

Occasionally, however, a montage of wonderfully balanced training makes the rounds.

Marquise “Hollywood” Brown bounding? Retweet.

Antonio Brown working with Dan Pfaff on speed drills? Add to story.

As a Patriots fan watching pregame warm-ups, the same goes for Julian Edelman doing A-skips and Rob Gronkowski doing A-run stepovers at 265 pounds.

These are just a few NFL examples, but with some digging you can find plenty of videos in the high school, college, or professional ranks to fit your agenda. Spotlight great athletes doing the relatively mundane, just like your team is trying to master the basics.

There Are Many Roads to Buy-In

Specificity is a rabbit hole I don’t particularly enjoy going down. Athletic development isn’t always about being as specific as possible. Lots of things support sprinting and performance that don’t look like the sporting action itself. There is nothing wrong with developing general qualities to create better athletes and healthier ones in the process.

There is nothing wrong with developing general qualities to create better athletes and heathier ones in the process, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

To move beyond just assigning workouts and to start to develop athletes, coaches must find an entry point that they are comfortable with. Once you begin the process of developing athletes for the long haul, it will become part of the culture of the program. Some patience is required, as Rome wasn’t built in a day. Laying a simple and solid base of key drills and movements will allow a coach to sprinkle in variations to further challenge athletes while keeping interest high.

Celebrating improvements and efforts is a good way to show the athletes that this is truly important stuff. Likewise, a coach who can demonstrate and explain drills fairly well can enhance the learning experience for both themselves and their athletes. This can result in an understanding of where each drill fits contextually and where to go next.

The fact remains that the training of some of the best athletes on the planet features drills and movements that your athletes are doing or will progress toward. Highlighting this behind-the-scenes work could be valuable so they have an understanding of the pace and plan to progress to the higher-level drills done by their idols.

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

Starting with the end, ultimately, we want our athletes to be able to execute “sport specific activities with the greatest possible intensity, frequency and sustainability”—aka, become fitter (Mladen Jovanović). Being unfit will therefore inevitably limit our maximum possible output and precision throughout the game and give us fewer possibilities to succeed. If we want to outrun a game, or at least be fit enough to create sufficient scoring opportunities, we need to think about how to best invest our time and energy into any sort of conditioning method to improve or at least not suck at this crucial physical capacity.

There seems to be an emotional controversy about the preferred method to implement in order to elicit superior gains in ‘fitness,’ says @DanielKadlec. Share on X

Although we have a plethora of conditioning methods available in our toolbox, there seems to be an emotional controversy about the preferred method to implement in order to elicit superior gains in “fitness.” (I’m deliberately avoiding any reductionistic metric.) While we can choose from tempos, continuous steady-state cardio, cross-training, Tabata, Fartlek, MAS, RST, HIIT, SIT, SSG, ACDC, and more, their common claims of distinct adaptive responses seem to disappear when adjusting for total heartbeats per session¹. Understanding that those methods have more overlying similarities than discrete differences can stop us from overthinking and wasting planning time and help us accept that many paths lead to Rome—aka being “game fit.”

Threshold This, Lactate That… Does It Matter?

And the list goes on, with big words like mitochondrial density, left ventricular hypertrophy, H+ buffer capacity, PCR re-synthesis, anaerobic speed reserve—and this is just a snippet of what I was taught and what I perceived to be critical to understand if I wanted to plan an effective conditioning program. This, in combination with the fallacious belief that every such “lab-discovered” limiting capacity can be improved with only one method, made me waste hours and hours trying to piece it all together while keeping my approach periodized and sport-specific. The more I went down the reductionistic rabbit hole, the greater my confusion. Today, I couldn’t care less about what any of this even means.

With the end goal in mind—being game fit—the main challenge is to identify the most appropriate and efficient combination of intensity, volume, and modality that fits our respective context. While we know both ends of the continuum (high volume versus high intensity), and anything in between (figure 1), can elicit tremendous fitness gains and have led athletes to remarkable running performances, we also need to acknowledge—as with every intervention with this complex and nonlinear system called human—the inevitability of individual responses (figure 2).

While the relative risk of non-responding is equally high in each approach in trained athletes, it would be nothing but foolish and narrow-minded to selectively invest our resources in just one approach, especially with team-sport athletes. Furthermore, it seems that fitness gains are more robust and less fluctuating in less fit athletes following a high-volume approach compared to other methods². Although, we accept and promote a “vertical integration” approach with everything we do in the gym throughout the whole season, it seems many are married to an “either/or” approach with their conditioning preferences.

To further polarize the discussion as to what approach to use, many methods have not only distinct, but flawed, evidence-based adaptive certainties attached to them in order to calm our order- and structure-seeking minds (i.e., if you do conditioning type X, then adaptation Y will happen) (figure 3), but also fundamentally arbitrary dogmas. Despite popular belief, every energy system is, congruently to every strength quality, 100% trainable. Its necessity, however, depends entirely on the strengths and weaknesses of your athlete in combination with the specific demands of your sport.

Also, where is this dogma coming from that high levels of blood lactate are destroying your mitochondria?! (Now reading this, it feels like the pinnacle of reductionist thinking, while fundamentally ignoring complex systems.) If true, every single wrestling, judo, and ice hockey athlete in the history of mankind would have literally zero functioning mitochondria. It’s laughable, and reality proves it wrong.

Know Your Game

We all know it’s easy to make someone fitter, but the million-dollar question is, are we preparing the athlete for the demands of the game as well? Especially for the physiologically and mechanically most stressful demands, which coincide to reflect the most crucial, game-deciding moments. While there is now an endless number of metrics I can use to inform my decision-making, I’m limiting myself to high-speed running volume (anything above 5 m/s or 18 km/h in my context) and time @ >90% heart rate max.

This is because, first of all, if you can’t tolerate running fast repeatedly, you will have fewer chances to put yourself into scoring opportunities, while your hamstrings are a ticking time bomb. Second, the team/individual who makes the first mistake during highly contested and intense game plays due to an inability to maintain appropriate skill execution or decision-making typically gets scored against, while only insufficiently recovering for subsequent bouts. Having deciphered those metrics as my primary conditioning KPIs, I can now start to reverse-engineer and determine what my athlete doesn’t experience during practice yet will definitely encounter during a game.

I’m preferentially choosing those methods that can give me either a ‘high-speed running’ overload or a ‘time >90% HR max’ overload, whichever suits my current context, says @DanielKadlec. Share on X

As training time is always precious, and the SAID principle still governs all adaptive responses, especially when looking from a phenomenological point of view, I’m preferentially choosing those methods that can give me either a “high-speed running” overload or a “time @ >90% HR max” overload, whichever suits my current context—i.e., tempo runs or any intensive interval setting with a work:rest ratio of 2-3:1, which ensures heart rate stays elevated. As a rule of thumb (thanks to Martin Buchheit), if you want to stay fit, you need >5 min @ >90% HR max per week and if you want to get fitter >10 min @ >90% HR max per week is a good start. Done.

Apologies to all exercise physiologists who still believe highly specific interval types are necessary to elicit any superior adaptations, while in reality total time @ > 90% HR is a “good enough” stimulus and the main driver for getting fitter independent of interval type³. In my understanding, both types are located within the high-intensity approach and can be further adjusted to meet secondary KPIs such as acceleration and deceleration efforts and specific work:rest ratios; again, if practice doesn’t tick these boxes already (video 1).

With that, it’s obviously highly beneficial to know what the specific demands of your respective game and practice are so as not to rely entirely on a best-guess approach. Using evidence, technology, and/or interns equipped with stopwatches are all great ways to get more insight into what your athletes are dealing with. That’s my first box to check—I push the ceiling with high intensity.

Video 1: Adjusting the conditioning modality to additionally expose the athlete to acceleration and deceleration efforts. Sorry for the video quality, but you get the idea.

Since I don’t know what the game and practice demands are, as mentioned before, I put all my resources into what the athlete is not experiencing but needs. The athlete already gets bucket loads of the medium-intensity part, so I therefore fearfully avoid tapping into it. I just can’t see any additional benefits, since the stimulus is already fundamentally oversaturated (figure 4). However, there seems to be an exponential interest in the potential benefits of SSGs (small-sided games)—aka doing more of what you are already doing—over the last decade based on publication numbers, with its assumption to get fitter while improving your technical-tactical abilities at the same time. Yet, “the man who chases two rabbits, catches neither.” (Confucius)

Doesn’t EVERY drill already include at least two players doing some sort of sport-specific tasks for a certain period of time followed by a rest? Yet now we call it “SSGs,” even though it has actually been around for as long as sports exist. The good thing is we now have about 438 papers highlighting the statistical significance between 6v6 on a 30m x 30m and 5v5 on a 25m x 25m pitch on any “lab-discovered” metric. Every time a new method promises superior gains per unit of invested resource, you should be highly cautious and skeptical. Simply put, “there is no substitute for hard work.” (Thomas Edison)

Polarized FTW

Now that we effectively overloaded the high-intensity needs and successfully neglected the medium part, we need to accept and acknowledge the undeniable potential of the high-volume/low-intensity approach, which fits perfectly into a polarized model. However, everyone seems to hate it… why?

Is it because of this reductionist fear of a muscle fiber shift? I’d agree, if you never EVER sprint, accelerate, jump, and/or lift. Is it because it can add fatigue? I’d agree, if you never heard of the concept of progression. Or is it because it’s not fun? Try sucking at your sport—that’s not fun either.

For decades, if not centuries, steady-state running was the basis of all physical preparation programs independent of sport or occupation, while still being able to show incredible feats of lightning-fast movements—think of all martial arts forms or every single team sport up until the late 2000s. And, if I remember history right, didn’t Rocky Balboa single-handedly end the Cold War by defeating Ivan Drago (after a full 15 rounds!) with nothing but continuous steady-state cardio in the snow?!

Since we know that fitness is, in plain terms, primarily a function of a sheer accumulation of additional heartbeats per unit of time—think “more equals fitter”—it’s no surprise that fitter athletes are those who just have a higher total weekly running volume (figure 5). With their heart rate increasing linearly during submaximal intensities, there is just no substitute to exposing athletes to high(er) volumes if you want to reap the benefits from this approach.

While this method is obviously more time-consuming, it’s just not suitable as a top-up method after practice compared to a high-intensity approach. So, we can either tell our athletes to go for a longer jog on non-practice days—or any other conditioning method that we deem most appropriate for this athlete—or chop it into bits and invest 10–20 minutes before AND after every practice. Remember that weekly volume, independent of its accumulation, drives fitness, especially with less-fit athletes being less prone to not responding. In order to keep it truly low-intensity, I usually instruct them to “hardly break a sweat,” and after completion I want them to feel like the run can’t possibly have made them any better. That’s the second box I tick—I pull the floor with high volume.

Never Not Running

As with everything in life, consistency is the essence of any progression. If you’re not doing any conditioning work on a weekly basis for up to 50 weeks/year (enjoy your winter vacation), it’s less important to debate about the method of conditioning. A consistent approach also just can’t be outperformed by any “HIIT block” or “shock micro cycle” as, although the fitness gains are impressive, the reversibility after not being exposed to this stimulus density anymore is almost perfectly equal to the rate of adaptation. Short-lasting gains for a lot of pain, or as Bruce Lee said 50 years ago, “long-term consistency trumps short-term intensity.” Additionally, in the absence of any acute or chronic injury, the law of specificity dictates not to expect any meaningful benefits to your running performance when doing biking/rowing/boxing/AirBiking if your fitness level is not shocking.

If you want to become fitter for your sport, the hierarchical order for how to best invest your time is: pull the floor, push the ceiling, sprint, play your sport, says @DanielKadlec. Share on X

Ticking those easy-to-implement boxes has profoundly simplified my approach to conditioning for team sports. I’m spending little to no time deciphering the meaning of all the “lab-discovered” breakthroughs and have stopped worrying I might miss out on any new or magical 1%-er. Anyone remember mouth taping?

Here is my recommendation, in hierarchical order, for how to best invest your time if you want to become fitter for your sport (figure 6).

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. Rodrigues JAL, Philbois SV, de Paula Facioli T, Gastaldi AC, de Souza HCD. “Should Heartbeats/Training Session Be Considered When Comparing the Cardiovascular Benefits of High-Intensity Interval Aerobic and Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training? A Critical Appraisal.” Sports Medicine Open. 2020;6(1):29. Published 2020 Jul 15. doi:10.1186/s40798-020-00257-8

2. Zinner C, Schäfer Olstad D, Sperlich B. “Mesocycles with Different Training Intensity Distribution in Recreational Runners.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2018;50(8):1641-1648. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000001599

3. Fitzpatrick JF, Hicks KM, Hayes PR. “Dose-Response Relationship Between Training Load and Changes in Aerobic Fitness in Professional Youth Soccer Players” [published online ahead of print, 2018 Nov 19]. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2018;1-6. doi:10.1123/ijspp.2017-0843

4. Vickers AJ, Vertosick EA. “An empirical study of race times in recreational endurance runners.” BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2016;8(1):26. Published 2016 Aug 26. doi:10.1186/s13102-016-0052-y

(Lead photo of Eric Burns credit: UNI Athletics)

The genesis of this article comes from a presentation I was asked to do at the trackandfield.coachesclinic.com “Virtual Summit” hosted by CoachTube. That talk was aimed at providing an in-depth look at the training of our two top long jumpers at Loyola University Chicago, Eric Burns and Mackenzie Arnold. Elaborating on that talk, I’m developing a multi-part series to go into further detail on advanced development in the long jump.

The underlying theme at play in this project is the attempt to discover novel pathways to enhance dexterity along with speed/power gains through the conjunction of various training concepts¹. This involves finding subtle progressions of specificity through manipulating the practice environment to not only educate and challenge each athlete, but to also get those adaptations to solidify long term. In other words, finding ways to synthesize speed/power capabilities into the skillful action of the event harmonizing speed, power, and skill into greater synchronicity.

After all, high speed/power proficiency with low long jump skill capacity is an unhealthy combo. It’s critical that coaches pay careful attention to how they are developing physical abilities along with requisite long jump skills. That compatibility is essential to advanced development in the long jump.

High speed/power proficiency with low long jump skill capacity is an unhealthy combo, so it’s critical that coaches pay careful attention to how they are developing physical abilities along with requisite long jump skills. Share on X

What I’m proposing is that long-term growth in the event comes from the amalgamation of these three qualities to cement skillful problem-solving execution at higher speeds, thereby nurturing greater levels of velocity into sound technical proficiency and decision-making processes. Speed is king in the long jump, but it must be transferred into the specifics of all that encompasses that movement pattern.

Schematics of Resisted Sprint Training on the 1080 Sprint

No discussion of long jump development can be divorced from speed development. Velocity is the primary driving force that provides the conditions for the possibility of longer jumps. Our uses of the 1080 Sprint center around resisted and assisted sprinting. Specifically, with resisted sprinting we’ve tried many different methods over the years. One year we attempted to figure out ideal resistances for each athlete; another year we would surf between a wide array of resistances within each session; other times we would lock into a singular resistance within a session or training cycle, and a few other variations in between.

No discussion of long jump development can be divorced from speed development. Velocity is the primary driving force that provides the *conditions for the possibility* of longer jumps, says @BobThurnhoffer. Share on X

The problems that arose became either having too much or too little variety. Drifting between too many resistances yielded too varied of a training stimulus, which meant inconsistencies in departure angles, ground contact times, and flight times from rep to rep. The issue with using only a singular resistance would be boredom, accommodation², and training plateaus with diminished potentiation during each session.

Another aspect of working with the 1080 is the breadth and depth of data that can be used and analyzed both within the practice and later in post-practice debriefs. The rabbit hole of possible data analyses is virtually endless. The goal heading into this year was to find a way to narrow the variety of resisted sprint training stimuli and tighten our focus on which data we would choose to focus on, while still providing a clear and consistent training stimulus within each session and training cycle. Thus, we adopted some strength and power development concepts and applied them to our resisted sprint training program:

• • Zones

 

• • Power output data

 

• • Velocity measurements

 

• Power first model

We didn’t necessarily track the ideal resistances for our athletes—instead, we had target zones that we would work within for each mesocycle and track the data within those zones. Bryan Mann’s velocity-based training categories of starting-strength, speed-strength, strength-speed, accelerative-strength, and absolute-strength were influential in this framework as well³. We could favor resistances or schemes within the zone for each individual to get the best out of each session. That more precise variability of training inputs provided opportunities for consistency and clear data tracking, while still having a healthy amount of variety to provide potentiated repetitions and individualized loading.

These zones aren’t too scientific, they are quite simple. The idea was merely to purify the resisted sprint training stimulus by narrowing in on the resistances within the session and each training cycle, all the while priming future training cycles and leaving room for some variability. We used 6 zones, each consisting of 5 resistance settings:

1. 1. Zone 1: 1-5kg

 

1. 1. Zone 2: 6-10kg

 

1. 1. Zone 3: 11-15kg

 

1. 1. Zone 4: 16-20kg

 

1. 1. Zone 5: 21-25kg

 

1. 1. Zone 6: 26-30kg (although we never used Zone 6)

 

Our resisted sprint training concepts revolved around heavier early stage acceleration work and lighter late stage acceleration work. Most of our heavier reps were 10m in length, but occasionally extended to 15m later in the year; meanwhile, our lighter reps ranged from 20m-40m. Typically, Zones 3-5 were used for shorter, heavier repetitions, while Zones 1-2 were for the lighter and longer reps. When we did shorter, heavier reps, we would track peak power output (W); when we did lighter and longer reps, we would look at peak velocity achieved (m/s). I recognize that there are some flaws in looking only at those data points since they don’t tell the whole story of a sprint, but the immediate accessibility and relevance provide ample measurements to track over time and use to make in-practice decisions.

Often, our resisted efforts were complexed with unresisted acceleration sprints through Brower timing gates of whichever segment of the sprint we were working on for that session. Typically, we used tape drill measurements to develop skills of rhythm and projection⁴. Sets consisted of a single resisted rep, followed by a single unresisted rep. This was partially to keep the divide in volume of resisted vs. unresisted acceleration work around 50-50; from a practical standpoint, it helped with practice flow when we had groups of 8 or more. There were times when we did isolated sessions instead, meaning we did only resisted or unresisted sprinting on a given day. In particular, when we had a focused assisted sprint training day within a microcycle, we would have a dedicated isolated, heavy resisted sprint training day on a separate neural session within the week. This clear division of weekly neural ⁵ themes allowed us to cultivate adaptations at opposing ends of the force-velocity curve.

It’s worth noting here that the most important speed development work for a jumper is pure unresisted/unassisted sprinting—however, through a regimented resisted and/or assisted program, those unresisted/unassisted reps can have greater significance. Later in this series I’ll mention some potential future adjustments to our implementation of resisted sprinting, but for the purposes of this article I want to narrow in on our heavy resisted sprint training program to exemplify our methodology.

The most important speed development work for a jumper is pure unresisted/unassisted sprinting—however, through a regimented resisted and/or assisted program program, those unresisted/unassisted reps can have greater significance. Share on X

Referring back to the six zones mentioned above, Mackenzie almost exclusively used Zone 3 for her heavy resisted work, while Eric used Zones 4 and 5. By locking into these zones for mesocycles at a time, we could use the data to adjust the session while keeping the cleanliness of stimuli within the zone. We could also favor heavier or lesser resistances within the zone based on individual needs week-to-week, and continually prep future training weeks and cycles. When we did complexes of heavy resisted followed by unresisted work, we found that drop-in accelerations worked best. The extreme difference moving from heavy resisted to bodyweight makes it difficult to execute sound static starts. However, as mentioned above, we did have many sessions where we only did heavy resisted work. There were also a few occasions where we did segmented acceleration sessions: meaning, we did all our resisted work followed by all unresisted work, not complexed.

Complexes, segmented, and isolated sessions work well and it’s worth doing all three throughout the macrocycle, but typically the isolated sessions produced the better power outputs. Also, I’ve found that jumpers get more out of consistent heavy sled exposures compared to pure short sprinters. The magnitude of push involved in that kind of activity compliments approach dynamics and impulse at takeoff quite well. Short sprinters, on the other hand, benefit more from lighter resisted work to feel the congruency and rhythm of acceleration with subsequent transition into upright mechanics. Both long jumpers and short sprinters benefit from both heavy resisted and light resisted work—my point, though, is that the division of labor may skew slightly one way or the other based on the nature of their primary event.

Reorganizing Peak Power Towards Greater Velocity

Throughout each session, we would pay attention to postures, shin angles, and ankle function while analyzing peak power outputs achieved on each heavy resisted sprint. The guiding methodology was the idea of hitting big peak power outputs at higher resistances within the zone, then attempting to sustain those peaks at lower resistances. By doing so, the peak power output (W) evolves from higher force (N) to greater velocity (m/s). The thinking was to constantly attempt to transfer big power peaks down to lighter resistances, making it at least one small step closer in specificity. The term specificity here has a twofold meaning:

1. 1. The simple idea of a training exercise looking more like the event itself.

 

1. 1. The notion of targeting a very specific form of adaptation.

 

Both definitions are at work here. Furthermore, we could consistently track peaks achieved at each resistance for each athlete and compare week to week. Success was measured mostly by bridging the gap of peak power output from higher resistances down to lower resistances within the zone; however, we also looked at consistency of high peak exposures, and personal bests at each resistance. Thankfully, one of our assistant coaches, Anthony Sierra, knew exactly what we were looking for so he mostly worked the 1080 and gave me the results while I monitored and watched the practice. Decisions to stay, move up, or shift down in resistance throughout the session were made in practice based on the data in order to maximize the quality of each session.

We would start at the lowest resistance of the zone and work upwards by 1-2kg until a large peak power output was achieved. Then, we would work back down and try to sustain similar peak power outputs at lesser resistances, finishing the session back at the lowest resistance. Sometimes we would stay at a higher resistance for several repetitions to accumulate more high peak exposures, particularly on week 3 of a 4-week mesocycle. At other times—mostly later in the year—we would quickly work up to a big peak at a high resistance, then work the lower resistances in greater volume.

The range of resistances within a given zone allowed for plenty of flexibility within the framework of a narrow spectrum of resistances. We would work the resistances based on the targeted demands of each training cycle while also monitoring the fatigue and technical execution of each athlete, each day. Taking those factors into account, we let the data guide us on in-practice decisions of which resistance to move up or down to within the session based on performance and/or fatigue.

For Eric, early in the fall we worked Zone 4 in preparation for Zone 5, which served as a quasi-rate of force development type of zone or max resisted effort in terms of highest resistances utilized.

Later in the year, we did extend the reps out to 15m and used that both as a further progression and as a way to maintain peak power output qualities by paying attention to density patterns and touching on it bi-weekly during the indoor season. We also minimized the zone to three resistance settings (21kg-23kg) when we extended the reps out to 15m and did not go up to 24kg-25kg.

 

Closing Remarks

To summarize, our methods in heavy resisted sprint training boil down to transferring big power outputs down to lower resistances. The idea was to gather up big power outputs (W) at high resistances favoring more force (N) and convert them into lower resistances favoring more speed (m/s), since by achieving equal or better peaks at even 1kg less brings one small step closer in specificity. Although force is very important, speed is more specific to success in the long jump and peak power outputs have to be gradually conditioned through faster expression capabilities. This is especially the case when considering connecting added velocity to the long jump takeoff. Maintaining or surpassing peak power outputs achieved at high resistances down at lower resistances mutates the nature of that peak power into greater specificity through higher velocity.

Although force is very important, speed is more specific to success in the long jump and peak power outputs have to be gradually conditioned through faster expression capabilities, says @BobThurnhoffer. Share on X

Philosophically, the idea of transfer espoused here is nothing more than taking an event or a component of an event, such as an acceleration sprint, finding a way to overload it, and then moving back to a lesser loaded version of the exercise to solidify training gains down at loads closer to the nature of the event.

In general, adaptations can be quantified—such as through the methods mentioned above—by working on the raw materials of speed/power while tracking data through various forms of training technology; or qualitative, by refining skills and mastering a technical model, which will be addressed in future articles. Transfer of training can yield both forms of adaptation, and at a preeminent level, integrates them altogether.

Overload can come through resistance, assistance/speed, volume, duration, and/or added coordinative challenge. In this case we added resistance, but by doing so the activity becomes less specific; the tradeoff, however, is that the training stimulus can become very high since large power outputs require large resistances. The methodology of gradually reducing the resistance while maintaining peak power is an attempt at taking small steps towards specificity during a session, since gradually unloading resistance equals higher specificity and therefore higher eventual transfer so long as peak power output can be sustained—and, as noted above, there’s the notion of specificity as a very specific form of adaptation, namely high peak power outputs at lighter resistances within each distinct zone.

The image of gathering training inputs through higher loads or added constraints, then carrying them closer to the event as it is in itself through reduced loads or constraints, is a motif you’ll see take various forms throughout future articles. Moving forward, I’ll cover methods to transfer velocities achieved with assisted sprints into the natural max velocity capabilities of the athlete, with an eye towards bringing those newfound velocities into the long jump approach.

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

References

1. Bernstein, Nikolai A. Dexterity and its Development. (p. 393-398). 2016: Routledge

2. ALTIS Foundations module 4.2 on Adaptation.

3. Mann, Bryan. Developing Explosive Athletes: Use of Velocity Based Training in Training Athletes 3^rd Edition. (p. 20). 2016: Ultimate Athlete Concepts.

4. Stuart McMillan. Concepts in Acceleration, ALTIS 360 presentation.

5. USTFCCCA Academy curriculum.

I’m sure all of you have gone through this before: Training sessions have been going as planned, and your squad is getting faster, stronger, and more explosive. Then, one day you walk in to greet your athletes and get the “So, this happened at practice…” scenario. A sprained ankle from going too hard during a small-sided game, beat-up shoulders from too many balls thrown or laps swam, or exhaustion from enduring the dreaded “extra conditioning” for disciplinary action.

Most of us understand in today’s multi-/year-round sport landscape, our plans and programs are at the mercy of any repercussions from practices and competitions. Share on X

Most of us understand in today’s multi-/year-round sport landscape, our plans and programs are at the mercy of any repercussions from practices and competitions. If you work with developmental athletes, you can also add in the compounding kids will do stupid stuff and hurt themselves factor and then quickly learn what agile periodization looks like!

If you’re fortunate enough to get feedback from your coach on a regular basis, then planning for these instances will be a tad easier. You can now think ahead to adjustments you can make for lower body training on “flipper day” if you happen to get a handful of swimmers with sudden foot, knee, and ankle issues. If you find yourself having to negotiate an extensive “DON’T” list from ATCs, PTs, or the doctor, then you may have your work cut out for you.

In either case, you don’t have to let your squad succumb to getting “doctored” out of training. I get it: Pain is an inhibitor of movement, and a true injury is debilitating. But if they were still able to step foot into the room, then they still ought to do something effective. As coaches and facilitators of their success, we must never allow our kids to gravitate toward ease and shy away from the work.

Remember in the movie 300 when Dilios patched his eye?

King Leonidas: “Dilios, I trust that ‘scratch’ hasn’t made you useless.”

Dilios: “Hardly, my lord, it’s just an eye. The gods saw fit to grace me with a spare.”

An extreme example, I know—but are initiative, obligation, and effort not foundations of a formidable culture? Do we not want our athletes to learn about the value of finding ways to succeed despite setbacks? Or about upholding their commitment to the team and themselves? This can be a deeper discussion in and of itself, but I digress.

Let’s also distinguish the scenario of injury versus acute restriction. As stated above, an injury would be physical damage to the body that prevents someone from performing a task. As we know, this can and DOES happen in practice and play. In this case, you most likely will receive communication of the incident, and the athlete may or may not be at the session. If you receive an athlete who is reporting the injury to you, it is your LEGAL, ETHICAL, and MORAL obligation to send them to the ATC office or require an outsourced appointment to a qualified physician for a diagnosis.

For those athletes not in this category but reporting an ache, pain, nick, or ding, we can consider them as having an acute restriction. Sound and legal practice calls for us to listen to the athlete about the issue and make the necessary change. In no way are we to apply any other type of intervention! So, without burdening yourself with the idea of, “what the hell do I do now?” I’ll explain how you can still deliver the goods to the athlete and not have to sacrifice the integrity of the program.

What We Can Progress, We Can Also Regress

Most of you are familiar with systems of progression and regression that may be based on these factors:

1. Skill level—Does this athlete consistently perform the basic pattern in a flawless manner? If so, in what way can we challenge them further?
2. Strength level—Has this exercise run its course with this athlete? Is it no longer driving progress?
3. Readiness—Does it look right; does it fly right? If not, is this athlete ready for this today?

Data collection, the coach’s eye, and communicating with your athletes can all help you answer these questions. From there, having a system in place helps to rectify the problems.

Coach Ashley Jones developed a system based on the statistical concept of the bell curve. The mean exercise (middle of the curve) represented the lift/exercise “middle” that the majority of his athletes could do at the time. Progressions and regressions of the exercise are represented by standard deviations of +/-1 or 2 based on the movement pattern.

For example, if the barbell deadlift is the mean exercise, regressions can include a trap bar DL and RDL (-1/-2, respectively), and progressions may include power clean and power snatch (+1/+2, respectively). Essentially, individualization of training can be administered without sacrificing the integrity of the program. Coaches can use the tools above, tempered by the experienced coach’s eye, to keep their athletes moving forward even if it means taking a temporary step or two back.

For coaches who have dealt with the M*A*S*H unit scenario, I understand how injuries can become a wrench in your day’s plan. Conceptually, we can borrow from Coach Jones’s system above to regress movements based on nicks, dings, and restrictions that day. I’ll list some examples I have encountered over the years, along with the reasons why. By no means is this an exhaustive or comprehensive list, but it does represent real-world adjustments I’ve had to make over the years.

Hinge-Based Movements

Given that Olympic lift variations involve an impact with the floor and more overall movement about the ankle, the kettlebell or dumbbell swing can serve as an ample replacement. Keeping the hips high (as in the high hang position) in this movement resembles a pure hinge, which reduces dorsiflexion of the ankle on the descent. The athletes with the ankle sprains or sore calf/Achilles can also preserve dynamic intent without the cost of impact.

If the back (lumbar) is irritated, then unloading this force becomes the call of the day. I have found that the classic hip thrust (loaded across hips) allows athletes to work through most back issues. Even though the dynamic nature of the movement may be compromised a bit, an explosive concentric action will mostly preserve the intent. This will allow those swimmers who had a heavy fly set to train around the issue for the time being.

I have found that the classic hip thrust (loaded across the hips) allows athletes to work through most back issues. Share on X

For your kids who have a “Don’t do anything with the arm” note from their doctor/ATC, fear not! Have them grab a dumbbell, and they can snatch and clean away (maybe even swing), for the gods were good enough to bless them with another! Mechanical loading may not be the same as a barbell, but the coordination challenge from this upper unilateral variation will be worth the sacrifice. As Bosch may suggest, the novelty of this new pattern will also serve as a bit of an overload.

Deadlift-Based Movements

Video 1. Suitcase-style deadlift (SCDL) for athletes with an acute restriction in a single shoulder or arm.

Depending on the severity of the ankle restriction, we can again limit dorsiflexion by utilizing a more hinge-based deadlift from a knee-high pin or RDL variation. For your field athletes who may have suffered a slight tweak or endured many COD contacts at practice, this will reduce flexion of the ankle while maintaining loading. Even though a pin deadlift will allow for more loading, I suggest you stay with what is planned or even lighter.

For your field or court sport athletes with the “Don’t do ___” notes, we can use a single leg variation (on the good leg) with a single dumbbell in one hand, one dumbbell in each hand, or a barbell. In this case, novelty will create the coordination overload in place of mechanical load.

For our kids with sore backs, the replacements for the clean will suffice. We can also eliminate load altogether and perform the reverse hyper/hip extension using a dedicated machine (if you have it) or over a glute ham or an angled bench. For this case, we can still train the musculature given comfort tolerance, which is also a regression we can make if they are fried from a hard practice or contest.

For our one-armed bandits, using the good one allows us to continue training and adds novelty. We can employ the suitcase-style deadlift to offer a challenge to the trunk and proprioceptive work. The SCDL can be done with a kettlebell, dumbbell, or barbell. For more advanced movers, we can add a rotational component via the “twist deadlift.”

Video 2. The twist deadlift is best performed with a kettlebell, and this variation calls for a load to be place on the outside of the foot next to the pinky toe. From here, the athlete hinges (as in a normal deadlift) and reaches for the bell with the opposite hand by rotating axially. Maintain tension in the hamstrings before ascending to the standing position.

Squat-Based Movements

I’ve experienced a slightly different injury set with this one, mostly regarding the knee.

If an injury to the lower limb or knee still allows some weight bearing—but limited movement—we can apply the high box squat, focusing on keeping a vertical shin. For what we may lose in transfer, we will gain in loading the hips and adductors. This is a great alternative for those in this bucket: Keep loading 5–10% lighter or simply have them work with the load the limb can tolerate.

If the restriction is severe enough that it doesn’t allow bilateral load, then a single leg variation will become necessary. Be wary here, as hooking the bad leg on a bench or support with an achy knee may aggravate it. The “pistol” style squat or rear foot suspended single leg squat will have to do.

If the ankle isn’t having it, then certainly DON’T use the classic split squat or lunge, as the rear leg ankle will be under increased stress. You can add the RFESS to the arsenal above. Even though load and force may be compromised, the novelty of stimulus will serve these athletes well as they heal. Your football lineman and flipper-day swimmers will appreciate this adjustment!

Video 3. How to cinch and adjust the bands and perform banded squat movements.

If the back is a limiting factor, we can load the legs via a leg press or belt squat machine (if available). If we aren’t fortunate to have those options, we can use the goblet squat with a kettlebell or dumbbell or rig a belt squat with a dip belt or bands. The classic belt squat will allow us to preserve load, and using bands we can work explosively, while preserving the back. To eliminate external load altogether, we can apply the bodyweight squat or use the support of the hands to further deload the system. This isn’t the most ideal situation, but “intensity” can be preserved using higher reps, tempos, isometric holds, and so on.

This squat adjustment uses the Hatfield/safety yoke squat bar—a tremendous tool that allows for all the benefits of normal squatting without the shoulder stress of holding a barbell. Share on X

For our one-armed bandits, our squat adjustments call for using the Hatfield/safety yoke squat bar if we have one. This tremendous tool allows for all the benefits of normal squatting without the shoulder stress of holding a barbell. If we don’t have this tool at our disposal, we can use the belt squat example above without any compromises. If kettlebells are available, hold one with the good arm in the front rack. What we give up in loading with this variation, we gain in novelty with the offset load.

Upper Body

Our final category will encompass the entire upper body. Most of the adjustments will be universal for push and pull exercises, along with some issues you may have not thought of.

I’m not one of these “anti-overhead” coaches who is fearful that my athlete’s shoulders will explode if they train presses; in fact, I truly believe it’s the other way around. But I do find it good practice to avoid vertical pushing and pulling if shoulder issues arise. For that reason, the adjustments will refer to horizontal pushes and pulls.

Reducing full range of motion in a horizontal push (or pull) will do wonders for limiting compromised ROM and keeping the intensity as intended. For our front seven who are in season or have had a tough day of “inside run,” we can go to the board press for our press work. We can also use a board to limit the ROM for those doing push-ups that day. Further unloading for the push-up can be accomplished by elevating the push surface or using a supportive apparatus, such as a band rigged across a rack. This will fit for athletes “bridging the gap” in a return to play scenario or foundational athletes beginning their training. A veteran squad should be familiar with the regression.

Altering the grip of overhead throwers to palm-facing is not the panacea that some make it out to be and will only work as well as they can anchor their scapula. Share on X

For our overhead throwers (baseball, volleyball, quarterbacks, tennis), we can alter their grip to palm-facing (neutral grip) via a specialized bar or dumbbells. Be warned, though—this is not the panacea that some make it out to be and will only work as well as they can anchor their scapula. If the shoulders are shrugged up and their elbows are winging, then somehow you need to teach them better technique. Swimmers in the shoulder M*A*S*H unit may use a long-duration isometric (LDISO) row to allow for a low-cost but effective stimulus that aids in posture development. Use 15- to 30-second holds in the TRX, cable, or band row in the uncompromised range.

For the swimmer who endured a voluminous pull set, a tennis player with a cranky elbow, or the baseball catcher with a beat-up hand, the simple solution is we go full one-armed bandit. Just about any single arm push or pull variation will fit, sans those one arm rows where you use your off hand to support posture. In this case, use the classic “Pass Pro” two-point stance, anchoring the forearm to the thigh, or use a cable or band. Given most programs use pulling exercises as “grinding style” for moderate-to-high rep ranges, we will not lose much regressing to a cable or band.

Adjusting exercises for a sore back is typically ignored, but any time we can mitigate lumbar extension we should consider it. They may be able to press vertically by getting in a half kneel or seated position (on the floor). Loads will lighten but will help mitigate lumbar extension as in a standing press. For horizontal presses, we can regress to floor presses or have them put their feet up on the bench. Load may be compromised, but it’s worth the trade-off minimizing hip/lumbar extension.

Externally loaded horizontal pulls are best done in chest-supported fashion by lying prone on a flat bench, eliminating the use of the spinal erectors by placing the bulk of the stress on the posterior shoulder girdle. For vertical pulls, we can either anchor the hips down on a standard lat pull-down machine or, when doing chin-ups/pull-ups, have them support their legs in front of them (with 90-degree hip flexion) on a bar if you have a rack setup or with a teammate.

Making adjustments in every facet of life comes down to what’s “available.” In this case, “availability” relies on:

1. Most importantly, current movement/loading restrictions based on aches, pains, or injuries from practice or competition.
2. Secondly, the equipment you have available to render those adjustments.

After all, is it not our job to help prepare and prime these athletes for practice and play? Two important aspects of making training adjustments (based on pain or injury) are that it allows for the maintenance of a baseline level of preparedness and it allows for a systemic unloading. Pain is a signal that maybe we do need to pump the brakes a bit. In a way it’s good—if we’re hurt or aching, now we can rest, recover, and come back stronger when called upon.

When Is It Time to Return to Normal?

This determination will be influenced by a range of factors, which (I hate to break it to you) will not be entirely up to us to decide but will be up to us to execute properly. Primarily, from a liability standpoint, we are at the mercy of clearance from a physician, PT, and/or training staff. Even for the acute restrictions, we are legally bound to follow the guidance of doctors and medical support staff. Whether we’re in the private sector or an academic setting, it behooves us to have good working relationships with these professionals, even if that simply means being available for a phone call consultation.

A range of factors determine when it is time for an athlete to return to normal. While it is not entirely up to us to decide, it is up to us to execute properly. Share on X

Once clearance is given, we must assess:

1. How much time we have remaining to effect positive improvement. If our time with an athlete is not year-round, we will have more time to reintegrate our M*A*S*H units earlier in a training season. If we only have a few weeks left, we honestly can’t expect to influence much—still, providing them a remnant of where they once were may be good for their soul and future progress.
2. The spirit of the athlete. This is a perfect opportunity for us to give our athletes “ownership” of their training. I prefer to give them a goal exercise to execute before they can return to their standard program—this way, they can approach the task with urgency or patience, regaining confidence at their own pace.

By no means is this an exhaustive list, nor are the regressions written in stone, but it should give you some pragmatic ideas and sound reasoning for adjusting your program on the fly. I can insert the classic cliché here, if you fail to plan, you plan to fail…but in all honesty, even our best-laid plans need “liquidity” to make slight or more drastic adjustments based on what’s available.

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

“Don’t forget your protein, bro.”

“Did you recover with a shake?”

“No protein, no muscle.”

You have likely heard any one of these statements and/or questions. Eating protein does not automatically translate into huge muscles. Rather, muscle protein synthesis (MPS) is a very complex process that requires sufficient calories and protein, along with two very key hormones produced in the body: human growth hormone and testosterone. Furthermore, muscle protein synthesis requires mechanical tension, muscle damage, and metabolic stress. To further enhance MPS, you must consider protein and calorie timing, protein type, and carbohydrates. Consuming dietary amino acids, specifically branched chain amino acids like leucine, around resistance training helps to enhance MPS.

Protein 101

Protein is a key nutrient responsible for several biological functions, including the repair and growth of many cellular structures like skeletal muscle. Dietary protein supplies the amino acids necessary for gene activity, transport of biological molecules, energy production, and the synthesis of hormones, enzymes, and neurotransmitters. For growth, repair, and synthesis of biologically active proteins, a positive protein balance must be attained and the rate of protein synthesis must exceed the rate of degradation. As you are learning, protein is vital to support the unique demands of growth, development, and normal physiological function during adolescence.

Young Athletes Have Greater Nutritional Needs

High school athletes have greater protein and carbohydrate needs than their less-active peers. Teen athletes require more calories to support training demands, proper growth, development, and maturation. Furthermore, we carry the habits built in our younger years into adulthood. It is paramount to learn healthy habits early on for long-term health and disease prevention. So how much is enough? For perspective, female teen athletes need roughly 2,200-3,000 calories and male teen athletes need roughly 3,000-4,000 calories per day (depending upon the individual and sport).

Many of the athletes I work with need to consume close to 6,500 calories, due to training load, volume, intensity, and their general day-to-day activity, says @Wendi_Irlbeck. Share on X

Multisport athletes have even larger caloric needs. A teen athlete who may play both baseball and hockey could need upward of 5,500-6,000 calories per day to maintain weight and support growth. In fact, many of the athletes I work with need closer to 6,500 calories, due to training load, volume, intensity, and their general day-to-day activity. I want to empower coaches to encourage adequate calorie consumption during times of heavy training. Check in with your athletes and ask them about their breakfast, snacks, and even what they had for dinner the night before while working out.

Rule #1 as coaches and health practitioners is to do no harm and reduce the risk of injury. There are consequences when anybody, and especially athletes, gets inadequate fuel intake. For example, low-energy availability in female adolescent athletes can lead to short stature, increased injury, delayed puberty, poor bone health, metabolic and cardiovascular issues, menstrual irregularities, and disordered eating behaviors. (You can read more here.)

Carbohydrates Are King for Energy

Carbohydrates are the preferred fuel substrate for optimal energy. Robust research consistently identifies carbohydrates as the primary macronutrient to sustain and enhance high-intensity performance. Official dietary guidelines for Americans recommend that 45-65% of the calories in a person’s diet should be carbohydrates. 

Fuel Tip: To ensure optimal health and athletic performance, athletes should make sure that half of their plate consists of carbohydrates. This is especially true for multisport athletes and those focused on endurance. A great rule of thumb is to fill up half your plate with whole grains like rice, tortilla, bread, and oats on heavy training days. A general recommendation for high school athletes is to consume roughly 360-500 grams of carbohydrates per day.

As noted above, failure to consume enough carbohydrates will increase the risk of injury, derail performance, hinder cognition, blunt focus, and limit athletic performance overall. The onset of fatigue and risk of making mistakes on tests or within drills at practice will also increase without enough dietary carbohydrates. My expert advice as an RDN is that carbohydrates are not optional—they are essential. For more information, please check out this article.

Failure to consume enough carbohydrates will increase the risk of injury, derail performance, hinder cognition, blunt focus, and limit athletic performance overall, says @Wendi_Irlbeck. Share on X

So, how much is enough? A 14-year-old female athlete, for instance, should consume 2,000-2,400 calories per day, with 225-270 grams (45% of total calories) to 325-390 grams (65% of total calories) from carbohydrates. The dietary reference intake (DRI) remains at 100 grams per day and the recommended daily allowance (RDA) at 130 grams per day for all age and sex categories (children ≥ 1 year). Neither measure is related to physical activity.

The best complex carbohydrates are those high in fiber, rich in B vitamins, and that contain whole grains. Examples include whole grain cereal, oats, bread, pasta, wraps, tortillas, and even oat and grain energy bars. Other examples include fruits rich in antioxidants like blueberries, strawberries, blackberries, bananas, apples, oranges, grapes, and tangerines. Remember, our blood glucose levels drive our muscle contraction and energy. For more ideas on optimal carbohydrate choices, take a look at this list.

How Much Protein?

In the meantime, the RDA for protein is 0.95 g/kg/day for children ages 4-13 and 0.8 g/kg/day for teenagers 14-18. Power sports like football, weightlifting, gymnastics, and wrestling require 1.0-1.5 g/kg/day. Athletes in regular resistance training and endurance sports like swimming, rowing, distance running, and soccer may need 1.2-1.4 g/kg/day.

The bottom line is that athletes need to consume more protein than non-athletes. According to the American Dietetic Association, Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine, 1.2-2.0 g/kg/day is the appropriate amount of protein, depending upon training.

Protein Options

A huge part of being healthy is maintaining a varied diet with an assortment of foods. That means it’s key to vary protein food choices to attain plenty of nutrients. Protein sources include both animals (meat, poultry, seafood, and eggs) and plants (beans, peas, soy products, nuts, and seeds).

Beef, bison, pork, chicken, turkey, tuna and other fish, seafood, pea protein, and dairy products are all examples of high-quality protein sources. Healthier lean sources of protein include chicken, turkey, fish, cottage cheese, Greek yogurt, beans, fat-free or low-fat milk, tofu, and edamame. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics has a larger list available to print out and hang on the fridge, post in the weight room, or take with you on your next grocery shopping trip.

Not all proteins are created equal. Ideally, you want to consume animal proteins rich in leucine, a branched chain amino acid for the greatest positive effect on increasing muscle protein synthesis.

Additionally, a 2015 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study found that pea protein offered similar effects as whey protein on muscle protein synthesis. However, pea protein contains less leucine per serving than whey protein. So, while you can still elicit similar MPS effects using pea protein, you would need to consume a greater amount of it. 

The best bet for this age group is to keep it simple. High school athletes should make sure they eat one-quarter of their plate or a 4-ounce serving of a high-quality protein 3-5 times per day. This is about the size of a deck of cards.

When Should I Consume Protein?

The amount of protein turnover increases with resistance training and may remain elevated for up to 48 hours if the athlete is younger or newer to a resistance training program. Research suggests several benefits to both pre-exercise protein and post-exercise protein.

Pre-Game Consumption

Be sure to choose familiar foods trialed during training and practices. NEVER try a new food on game day or competition day. Be sure to eat breakfast, lunch, and meals leading up to the competition. If you eat a meal, it should be 3-4 hours before the game, then another meal of foods that are low- or no fat about 60 minutes pre-game. Foods higher in fat and fiber will slow down digestion and cause stomach distress if consumed too close to game time.

Some good examples of pre-game meals to eat 60 minutes out:

• Turkey or ham sandwich with fruit
• Whole-grain cereal in a baggie and a banana
• 4 ounces of Greek yogurt with 1/2 cup of berries
• String cheese and grapes
• Whole-grain pretzels and 2 ounces of deli meat

 The key is to consume a little bit of protein and some carbohydrates to stay energized during the game.

To stay energized during a game, the key is to consume a little bit of protein and some carbohydrates 60 minutes beforehand, says @Wendi_Irlbeck. Share on X

Post-Game Consumption

The body’s ability to recover following training, practice, games, or conditioning relies on sufficient rest and proper nutrition. The key in recovery is to decrease physical breakdown and encourage muscle growth. This muscle remodeling process can be best simplified by using the “25-50-30 rule” that I educate my young athletes on. This means consuming 25 grams of protein and 50 grams of carbohydrates within 30 minutes of activity for optimal muscle protein synthesis and to restore muscle glycogen.

Keep in mind, if training intensity and duration are greater, you must consume more carbohydrates, so instead of 50 it would be 50-100 grams of carbohydrates. As a performance dietitian, I have found the best way to communicate nutrition to athletes is to keep it simple. “If you can’t explain it to a 6-year-old, you don’t understand it yourself,” as the brilliant Albert Einstein said.

Some examples of post-training meals that offer 25 grams of protein and 50 grams of carbohydrates are:

• 1 1/2 cups of Greek yogurt, 1 cup blueberries, and 1 English muffin
• 3-4 cooked eggs, 1 banana, and 8 oz. of low-fat chocolate milk
• 4-5 oz. of chicken, 8 oz. of low-fat chocolate milk, and 1 medium apple
• 6 oz. of Greek yogurt, 1 cup blueberries, a frozen banana, and 4 oz. of low-fat chocolate milk smoothie
• 4 oz. of deli turkey in pita wrap with hummus and 1 cup of grapes

More recovery options are available at TEAMUSA.

Limit Fiber Post-Training

It is important to note that foods rich in fiber should be limited in the post-workout meal. Dietary fiber is indeed healthy because it supports immune health, gut function, and appetite control, as well as preventing type 2 diabetes and decreasing the risk of cardiovascular disease and certain types of cancer. However, fiber slows down digestion, which is not the goal of recovery nutrition. You want to recover as quickly and efficiently as possible to prevent skeletal breakdown.

Limit fiber in your post-workout meal, as it slows down digestion, which is not the goal of recovery nutrition. You want to recover as quickly and efficiently as possible, says @Wendi_Irlbeck. Share on X

Skipping Meals Will Stunt Your Growth and Game

Skipping meals like breakfast will hurt your growth and your game. Missing out on protein and general nutrition during adolescence will lead to significant declines in energy, weight, muscle growth, and strength, while increasing the likelihood of fatigue. Does this mean your adolescent athlete should slam protein shakes? Of course not, but they should consistently consume whole foods at regular mealtimes.

While we’re on the subject, I often have conversations with young athletes who replace meals with a protein shake. This increases their risk of missing out on key nutrients for both health and athletic performance.

Consuming good old-fashioned chocolate milk on-the-go can be a great way to increase calories while meeting additional protein intake demands. Chocolate milk is highly underrated among parents, coaches, and health practitioners who are concerned about “too much sugar.” However, chocolate milk offers electrolytes and 8 grams of high-quality protein per cup, and it replenishes glycogen stores and rehydrates just as well as Gatorade but with a better nutrient profile.

Many athletes are exhausted and often have a decreased appetite from tough training. Chocolate milk is tasty, convenient, and well-tolerated, and it makes for a great alternative recovery beverage. There are also high-protein chocolate milk beverages from companies like Fairlife, TruMoo, and more.

I will repeat, however, that a protein shake or chocolate milk will NOT make up for missed nutrients from not consuming regular meals.

Beware of Both Plant and Animal Protein Powders

It seems like every athlete wants to take protein powders. Overall, you should focus on using real food first before you consume a pricey supplement that may not contain desired ingredients. In fact, many protein powders could contain heavy metals and other toxic ingredients. Plant-based protein powders have higher levels of metals than non-plant-based protein powders, according to the Clean Label Project’s study.

No dietary supplements, including protein powders, are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This means they have the potential to do more harm than good. Your best bet is to opt for a whey protein powder that has undergone third-party testing and has an NSF stamp of approval.

Taking a supplement or using a whey protein powder without knowing what it truly contains is not only negligent but selfish, as it could lead to you being sidelined and not supporting your team’s success. Championships aren’t won by one player—they require a team, and your team needs you healthy, safe, and on the field. For more information on supplements or to research third-party-tested supplements for safe use, check out Informed-Sport.

Again, food first, supplements second. Supplements are designed to fill the gaps in our nutrition, not to replace real food.

Sample of a High-Protein Day

Here is a sample menu, tailored especially as a high-protein day for competition.

• Meal #1: Two scrambled eggs, 1 cup of spinach, 2 oz. of flank steak on whole-grain toast, 1/2 cup blueberries, and 8 oz. of 1% cow’s milk.
• Mid-morning snack: 6 oz. Greek yogurt, 1/2 cup raspberries, 1 Tbsp. high-protein peanut butter. Another option is high-protein pancakes.
• Meal #2 (lunch): 4 oz. grilled chicken in lettuce wraps, 1/4 avocado, 1 cup of broccoli, apple slices, and 4 oz. skim cow’s milk.
• Mid-afternoon snack/post-workout: 1 banana, 2 Tbsp. high-protein nut butter, 16 oz. of milk, and 2 cups of spinach mixed in a blender with 1 cup of ice.
• Meal #3 (dinner): 4-6 oz. ground turkey, 1/2 cup chickpeas, and salsa in a whole grain wrap with 1 cup of roasted or sautéed veggies.
• Pre-sleep recovery meal or evening snack: 1 scoop of casein protein mixed with milk or 1 1/2 cups of cottage cheese with sliced kiwi.

If You Want to Win on the Field, You Must Win in the Kitchen

Name a NASCAR driver who begins the Daytona 500 with their fuel tank half-full. What about three-quarters full? Athletes who start their practice, game, race, or match with low fuel (minimal glycogen stores) from not eating breakfast, lunch, or other meals can end up having a poor performance. Skipping meals results in poor muscle contraction, slow reaction time, reduced speed, agility, and power output, and so much more.

The earlier young athletes and coaches understand carbohydrate and protein needs, the better off they will be as far as long-term health and athletic performance. Having a healthy relationship with food and understanding the basics is really important. Help create awareness of a balanced plate with high-quality snacks in-between regular meals.

What you do on the days, weeks, and months leading up to game day is what ultimately matters. Nutrition is an athlete’s not-so-secret weapon, says @Wendi_Irlbeck. Share on X

Eating one meal—i.e., breakfast, lunch, or dinner—coupled with snacks will help improve your health and sport performance. Never skip meals. Build a plate rich in colorful fruits and vegetables. Championships aren’t won overnight; they’re won in the off-season. What you do on the days, weeks, and months leading up to game day is what ultimately matters. As always, nutrition is an athlete’s not-so-secret weapon. As I always say, “Eat for health first and fuel for athletic performance second.”

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

I’ve never been extraordinarily fast.

In high school, I ran a personal best of 15.7 in the 110 hurdles, which didn’t even make the finals in my conference meet. I ran 41.2 in the 300 hurdles, but I never quite figured out a plan for that race and probably didn’t train well enough to be as fast as I should have been. I ran the open 200 one time because I was dealing with a hip flexor issue and didn’t want to hurdle, and I ran 24 flat. I split 52 in the 4×400. I ran a 4.7 in the 40 on a stopwatch held by a notoriously quick-fingered coach. I was a solid athlete, but I wasn’t exactly setting the world on fire.

But I’ll tell you one thing: I was a lot faster then than I am now.

See, for the last 16 years I’ve done nothing to stay fast or get faster. In college, I took my broomstick physique into the weight room and tried to get bigger and stronger. That carried over into my early 20s, until one day I decided I was “out of shape.” From the ages of 24 to 34, I was a jogger. I say jogger—and not distance runner—because I never really pushed the pace all that hard. I ran some 5Ks, a few 40-mile relays with friends, and even a half marathon about a year ago. In May of this year, with COVID-19 suddenly leaving me with lots of time to run, I ran my fastest mile (6:54) and 5K (24:14) ever.

I’ve come to like running quite a lot. My mental and physical health both benefit tremendously from it. On a run, I can clear my head completely, listen to music, think about my next house project, or watch the sunset and listen to the birds. Running truly brings me joy.

But in July, I quit running. Instead, I started sprinting.

The Birth of #CoachSpeed

As a coach, I train sprinters and hurdlers. I’ve become obsessed with the pursuit of speed: tracking data, finding growth, and chasing new PRs. I believe that when we don’t prioritize speed and instead focus on endurance or fitness-based workouts, we neglect the pure speed development of our athletes. In track, there are no medals given for who is in the best shape. Fast athletes win meets, and I’ve become committed to turning as many kids as I can into fast athletes.

In track, there are no medals given for who is in the best shape, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

I’ve been coaching for a while now, but I recently started to wonder if an old dog could learn new tricks. Or maybe more accurately, if an old dog could re-learn old tricks. Could a 34-year-old former sprinter who spent the last 16 years de-training speed teach his body how to move fast again? The more I saw the results my training methods had on my athletes, the more I wanted to know if those same methods would work for me as well. So, I decided to find out.

Once I got my hands on the Freelap timing system, it was game on. On July 13, I dug out my old spikes from high school and went out to the track to see what I was made of. Every day since then has been a learning experience, and today I’m here to share the nine lessons I’ve learned with all of you.

1. A Proper Warm-Up Matters More Than Ever

In high school, I warmed up like I’d just shown up fashionably late to a backyard barbecue: wander to the track after hanging out in the training room, go through the motions, and hop into the workout. On meet days, I’d sleep in my lawn chair until about 15 minutes before my event, do a few hurdle drills, then line up and go. I won or competed to win in a lot of the races I ran, so I never really bothered to change. Looking back, I probably wasn’t a lot of fun to coach.

I’ve found that it takes my body an insanely long time to be ready to sprint. I regularly run my fastest time of the day on my third or fourth attempt, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

Today, I can’t imagine trying to sprint without getting my body ready. I perform an extensive list of high-intensity sprinting drills with maximal intent, a much more disciplined and focused approach than I ever took in my younger years. Even still, I’ve found that it takes my body an insanely long time to be ready to sprint. For example, even after a focused ignition series and some accelerations or buildups, my first timed sprint is almost always trash. Sometimes my second one, too. I regularly run my fastest time of the day on my third or fourth attempt.

A couple weeks ago I ran my slowest times ever in five reps of a 10-yard start, only to turn around and PR two times in a row on a 20-yard fly. There could be a number of reasons for this, but one thing is for sure: After 16 years off, it takes a long time to wake this body up for explosive movements.

2. Recovery Between Workouts Doesn’t Happen Quickly

After my first maximum-velocity sprint workout, I was sore for three days. That’s despite the fact that I was very cautious (or at least, so I thought) about not doing too much. I did a full menu of sprint drills, and timed three 40-yard dash attempts on the track, with a best time of 5.14 seconds. That’s not a lot of volume, but my body wasn’t used to such a high-demand activity, and it took me a long time to recover.

Now that I’ve been at it for six weeks or so, I’m not physically sore the next day, but it still takes me at least three days before my body can handle another maximum-velocity workout again. The proof is in the timing: If I try to sprint two days in a row, or even after only a day off, there’s no way I’m going fast again. In fact, if I don’t wait long enough, I’ll be quite a bit slower. That’s the thing about sprinting: 120 yards of total volume doesn’t seem like it should take that much out of a person, but if you’re truly sprinting with maximal intent, it does.

From a coaching perspective, that’s really important to keep in mind. High school kids are made of rubber. They bounce back more quickly than I do, and they may not feel tired or sore the day after a high-CNS-demand sprint day. But performance will most certainly suffer. If you’re not timing and tracking data, how can you know what athletes’ bodies can actually handle? Great competitors will almost always tell their coaches they’re ready to rock, no matter how their bodies are feeling. As coaches, we have to know what our workouts demand of kids and be sure not to overload them with so much sprint work and so little recovery that their bodies begin to break down.

3. Time Your Rest, Too

On a similar note, if I want my reps to be fast, I have to rest longer than I think I do. A classic rule of thumb for sprint coaches is that athletes should take about one minute of rest for every 10 meters they sprint. Forty meters of sprinting, four minutes of rest. That’s all well and good, but I am here to tell you two things: At age 34, I need more than the prescribed dosage of rest if I want to go fast on the next rep; and if you don’t time your rest, you will almost certainly get it wrong.

Let’s say you’ve decided you need five minutes’ rest between reps. Five minutes is a long time to stand around. And if you’re like me, and you were raised on the notion that standing around for too long somehow makes the workout less effective, you’ll find yourself going a little stir-crazy. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve thought “that feels like about five minutes” only to check my stopwatch and learn that it had only been two and a half.

Don’t trust your internal clock during workouts. Time your rest, not to make sure you don’t take too much time, but to make sure you take enough, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

Don’t trust your internal clock during workouts. Time your rest, not to make sure you don’t take too much time, but to make sure you take enough. I like to go for a walk, catch my breath, and do a few leg swings to pass the time. Fresher is always faster, and faster is the goal.

4. Improvements Happen Slowly, and Not All Aspects Improve Evenly

Tony Holler often says that speed grows like a tree, which is to say that the gains don’t come all at once. They can take years to develop, and they won’t come at all if we neglect speed. This is something I talk to my athletes about all the time, especially the ones who become obsessed with the idea of breaking their own personal records every single time we train.

Think about it: When you set a PR, that means you were faster than you’ve ever been in your life on that specific rep. How realistic is it to think that you’ll be faster than you ever were in your whole life every single time you lace up your shoes? But, as my good friend Josh McClure often says, the blessing is in the work. Every time we train speed, we’re improving—even if we don’t set a new PR. The tree might not have produced any new fruit that day, but we still watered it and gave it what it needed.

Arboreal analogies aside, I’ve become guilty at moments of feeling the same way my athletes often do. Chasing PRs is addictive, which is a big part of the reason why speed training can be so powerful for athletes. The motivation is built into the workout. Ultimately, I’ve had to stop myself from getting too results-oriented to focus on the process of building speed over time, and remind myself of three key things:

1. Improvements take time. If you take a look at the chart below and examine the 20-yard fly, you can see that my first major breakthrough didn’t really happen until my seventh and eighth attempts.
2. Not all improvement is linear. For example, in the 10-yard dash, I saw some improvement early on, followed by a plateau and even a slight regression on the 10th attempt.
3. Not all aspects of sprinting improve evenly. To illustrate this, you’ll notice that I’ve seen huge gains in my 30-meter fly, but as of yet, I haven’t seen the breakthrough in the 40-yard dash.

There are a number of factors that go into a given performance on a given day. Some days you have it, some days you don’t. Some days you’re sore, or you were on vacation for a few days, or you ate a big dinner and decided to sprint in the evening, failing to learn the lessons pre-meet roast beef sandwiches tried to teach you way back in high school (or maybe that was me).

Recognizing this fact—and reminding myself constantly that the improvements will come with consistency—is what keeps me training. Sure, I haven’t had a major breakthrough in the 40-yard dash yet, but other performance indicators tell me it’s coming. Which brings me to my next point…

5. Tracking Data Is a Must

If you’re reading this article, the chances are good that you already know the importance of tracking data. If you want to improve something, you have to measure it. We must know and be able to quantify where we’re starting from and where we’ve been if we ever want to know how far we’ve come and where we’re headed. Without data, we have no tangible, concrete proof that our training is working. But I’ve also noticed some other things by tracking and analyzing my own data.

We must know and be able to quantify where we’re starting from and where we’ve been if we ever want to know how far we’ve come and where we’re headed, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

First, keeping notes on every workout and every rep helps me see things I might otherwise miss. For example, the second time I did a 10-yard dash workout, I didn’t break any single-rep PRs, but I did run all my attempts within .02 seconds of one another, and all of those were close enough to my PR that my average time over the second workout was faster than my first workout. As a PR chaser, I could have been disappointed at not setting a new one-rep max, but seeing all the data helped me to notice my own improved consistency.

Second, my data tracking helps me notice trends in my own training—like the fact that I’m consistently fastest around my third maximum-intent rep of a workout. Next, as I alluded to previously, tracking data can help me see if a breakthrough could be on the horizon. For example, I’ve improved my 10 and 20 fly times by 7.14% and 9.57%, respectively, which tells me that my top speed is increasing. With that knowledge, I can be pretty sure that it’s just a matter of time before I set a new PR in the 40-yard dash, even if it hasn’t happened yet. Knowing that a PR will come the next time I put it all together is encouraging, and it makes me excited to see what the future holds.

Finally, having meticulous logs of data helps me validate my own times. For example, in the chart above, someone might look at my 1.04 time in the 10-yard fly as a questionable outlier. I did at first, too, until I followed it up with a 1.06 on the very next rep. I was also able to cross-check it with the fact that I ran 2.08 in the 20-yard fly on the same day (different rep) and confirm for myself that my 1.04 split (19.67 mph) was accurate, and not a technology fluke. That was a huge moment for me, and I celebrated it with myself and anyone else who would listen.

6. Celebrate Every Win, No Matter How Small

Speaking of celebrating, I’ve made it a point to give myself a high-five for every breakthrough, every PR, and every victory, no matter how small. Not to get too theoretical here, but if you’ve done any reading on positive psychology, you know that positive emotions have the power to increase performance. Sometimes those positive emotions occur sort of organically, or maybe they happen because we worked hard and met a goal we’d set. But what if we can cultivate positive emotions for ourselves? By finding something to celebrate in every workout, that’s exactly what I’m trying to do.

What if we can cultivate positive emotions for ourselves? By finding something to celebrate in every workout, that’s exactly what I’m trying to do, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

This is an area of growth for me. As much as I think I do a pretty good job of celebrating my students, my athletes, and my own children when they do something cool, I sometimes fall victim to negative self-talk. We are often our own worst critics, and we’re conditioned not to celebrate ourselves publicly so as not to come off as arrogant or self-centered. But feeling good about what I’m doing is what keeps me coming back, so I’ve cut back on self-criticism and replaced it with self-celebration. Sometimes it’s easier said than done, but increasing my ability to find the bright spots in my training, no matter what, fuels my progress and keeps me hungry.

7. Sprinting Is Fun

I can distinctly remember a moment all the way back during my junior year of high school, competing in an indoor meet at Saginaw Valley State University. I was on the 4×200 relay, and it was a 200-meter indoor track with tight curves. We all know that small, indoor tracks with tight curves don’t typically yield fast times, and I honestly couldn’t tell you what my split was. But I remember feeling fast. I remember how exhilarating it felt to blast a full lap at top speed, the energy of the exchanges, all of it. It was the first time I can specifically recall feeling how much fun it is to push the body to maximum velocity.

I didn’t think I’d ever go fast again, to be honest. I had basically resigned myself to the fact that, in my “old age,” I’d be a jogger—logging miles to stay in shape and lifting weights to stay strong—and that would be the extent of it. But I can tell you this—even at age 34, sprinting is still an awful lot of fun. I’m moving faster than I’ve moved since I was a teenager, and it feels great. It’s liberating to do something you thought you might never do again.

The timing element of speed training actually adds to the fun. The hardest part is knowing when to quit, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

Not only that, but the timing element of speed training actually adds to the fun. With Freelap (or another such timing system), each workout has the potential to turn into a sort of beat-my-own-high-score game. I’m a huge believer in the gamification of training. By making the workout fun and using a “scoring” system that values ideal outputs, intent and effort from the athletes take care of themselves. The hardest part is knowing when to quit. I know that it’s not wise to overload my CNS too much on a given day, but I also know that when I’m close to a high score, I have the urge to try again. I’m like a kid in an arcade, except I never run out of tokens.

8. Having a Support Network Is a Game-Changer

One thing I take pride in as a teacher and a coach is my affinity for community-building. I know that it’s important in the classroom and in a team setting for people to feel like they have a support system around them, that they don’t need to be afraid to fail, and that we’re all giving 100% in order to get better together. I also know this to be true for myself—I need to have others around me who share my vision. I am not always the most motivated person, but I know if I have a team around me with the same goals, I become stronger.

For example, in March when COVID-19 derailed 2020, I knew I wanted to stay motivated to get outside and run. (Remember, this is before I started sprinting.) Recognizing that, I created a Socially Distant Running Club on Facebook that quickly grew to more than 160 people, many of whom I didn’t know. We cheered for each other from afar and kept one another motivated to pound the pavement in the darkest of seasons. It was great.

When I decided to reclaim my identity as a sprinter, I knew I’d need others around me for support, so I put out a call on Twitter.

I had no idea what to expect in response to this tweet, but what I got has been an absolute game-changer. Some of my favorite coaches, whose work I have incredible respect for, reached out to me and wanted to join in. I also heard from people I didn’t know. But we all had one thing in common: We’re coaches and former athletes who still want to train fast. The result has been the formation of the #CoachSpeed Training Community.

The way this community has grown has been really inspiring. In addition to a spreadsheet where we track our individual training data, we’ve started a group chat that is incredibly active. We touch on everything from training philosophies to long-term goals to individual workouts and techniques, as well as plenty of other topics. Last week, one coach remarked that our group chat has been the best speed PD he’s ever received. No matter the degree, position, or years of experience, everyone in our community has something to offer, and the level of support has been incredible.

On a personal level, I’m always psyched to talk to my new friends after a great workout, and equally psyched to hear when one of them achieves a new milestone. Within our group, we’ve recreated the feeling of being part of a team, albeit in a digital, social-media-based way. I’ll take this moment to say, if you’re reading this and it sounds like your kind of thing, we’d love to have you join us.

Video 1. How the #CoachSpeed Record-Rank-Publish spreadsheet works.

9. There Is No Other Exercise Like Sprinting

Near the beginning of this piece, I mentioned that after my first day of sprinting, I was pretty sore, despite having kept the volume very low. Keep in mind that I entered my speed training being in what most people would consider “good shape.” I ran several times a week, did bodyweight workouts, and lifted semi-regularly. But none of that mattered.

Sprinting is a total-body, high-intensity workout unlike anything else. It’s one of the most strenuous plyometric exercises there is. It requires tremendous force production and asks the body to coordinate movements that are much faster than anything that happens in the weight room. It demands strength and stability from the core to keep everything headed in the same direction and not flailing about. Simply put, even if you’re in “great shape,” if you’re not sprinting, you’re missing out on a high-demand exercise that requires little-to-no equipment or expensive gym membership.

Even if you’re in “great shape,” if you’re not sprinting, you’re missing out on a high-demand exercise that requires little-to-no equipment or expensive gym membership, says @TrackCoachTG. Share on X

If you take nothing else from my reflections, I hope you’ll take this: You need to start incorporating speed work into your workout routine right away. When done right, it works wonders. Give it a try; challenge yourself to do something you haven’t done in a while. You might not be very fast right now, but you’ll most certainly get faster. You might even get stronger. But one thing is for sure—you’ll learn some things about yourself and your training methods. I know I sure have.

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

Flashback: It’s toward the end of the 2008–2009 Premier League season, and my favorite team, Manchester United, are chasing their third consecutive League title. They have an unbelievable squad—a high-scoring forward line of Cristiano Ronaldo, Carlos Tevez, Dimitar Berbatov, and Wayne Rooney backed by a solid defensive spine, with Nemanja Vidic and Rio Ferdinand bringing muscle to the back line. But while playing Aston Villa, a strong team they need to beat in order to retain their EPL title, Man U fall behind 2–1. In the second half, scrambling for the two goals needed for the win, longtime manager Sir Alex Ferguson takes a huge gamble and subs in Federico Macheda, a 17-year-old phenom making his Manchester United debut at striker.

Macheda gets involved in the game. He has a claim for a penalty turned down and then makes some good runs into the box. Manchester United continue to apply pressure, knowing they need two goals, but the clock continues to wind down. Finally, in the 80th minute, Cristiano Ronaldo, in his last season for the club, scores from the edge of the box to draw the sides level.

United need one more goal and have 10 minutes to find it. They pour forward, throwing everything they have, but as the clock clicks toward the full-time whistle, they look destined to fall short. Then, there’s a break. Midfield stalwart Ryan Giggs wins a loose ball in the final third and plays it in to Macheda; with his back to the goal, Macheda carries out a first-time flick across his marker and shoots a curling shot that evades the outstretched hand of goalkeeper Brad Friedel, landing in the back of the net. (You can watch the highlights of the match on YouTube, with the sequence for Macheda’s goal starting at 2:55.)

Macheda can’t quite believe it. He runs, celebrating, toward the corner flag. The camera cuts to a man in the crowd celebrating, overcome by emotion, tears running down his face. It’s Macheda’s father, who moved with his son to Manchester when United offered him a professional contract; the man who worked night shifts as a security guard so that he could take his son training during the day. You can see how much it means to him. The Sky TV commentator, Andy Gray, pronounces that “a star is born.” Manchester United, with their rich history of finding and developing youngsters, have found their next star, with the world at his feet.

But sadly, it didn’t turn out like that.

Federico Macheda scored again—once—for United in the 2008–2009 season and was a bit-part player the following season. He then went on a series of loans; first to Sampdoria back in his home country of Italy (16 games, 1 goal), then to Queens Park Rangers (6 games, no goals), Germany’s Stuttgart (18 games, 0 goals), my hometown club of Doncaster Rovers (15 games, 3 goals), and Birmingham City, where he experienced some success, scoring 10 goals in 18 games. At the end of the 2013–2014 season, Macheda’s Manchester United contract expired, and he left the club on a free transfer, dropping down a division to play for Cardiff City in the Championship (33 games, 8 goals) before moving to Novara in Italy’s second division (52 games, 11 goals). Macheda—still only 28—now plays for Panathinaikos in Greece’s Premier Division, where he enjoys the form of his career, having made 53 appearances over the last two seasons, scoring 24 goals.

Nevertheless, it’s fair to say that Macheda didn’t make the impact as a professional player that many hoped he would, given both his explosive debut and United’s history of youth development. This where The Next Big Thing: How Football’s Wonderkids Get Left Behind comes in. Authored by Ryan Baldi, the book tells the stories of 15 football (soccer) players who seemed to have the world at their feet, but for a range of reasons, didn’t quite make it.

Challenging the notion that talent is somewhat linear—we expect good youngsters to progress to being good seniors, but what if this isn’t the case, asks @craig100m. Share on X

With individual chapters dedicated to each player, Baldi teases out the reasons behind the player’s lack of transition to elite senior, and there are some key trends and themes that emerge. Primarily, these are injuries, lack of opportunity for development, and external distractions. Within this story, however, is also a challenge to the notion that talent is somewhat linear—we expect good youngsters to progress to being good seniors. But what if this isn’t the case?

The Dynamics of Talent

Talent development is nonlinear; at the point of their initial success, some players might be much more physically or technically developed, giving the illusion of high levels of “talent” relative to their peers, who soon catch up to them. In football, talent is also somewhat subjective; while sports such as track and field use objective measures that can be employed to compare athletes, in football certain players might not suit a particular formation or just might not be preferred by a given manager.

Some of the same issues harm the development of athletes in track and field. There are a number of age-group championships that athletes can compete in. For example, in the U.K. an athlete can compete at indoor and outdoor age group championships (from under-15 to under-20), as well as Nationals Schools Championships (also under-15 to under-20). Additionally, athletes can compete at the World and European Under-20 Championships, along with the Commonwealth Youth (under-18) Games. Until 2017, athletes could also compete at the World Youth (under-18) Championships. Success at these championships and the expected linear development of athletes—i.e., this athlete is good at age 13 and so therefore will be good at age 25—quite possibly increase expectations and pressure on the young competitors.

What predisposes an athlete to success in the junior ranks, however, is not always what drives success at the senior level. For example, the “relative age effect” increases the chances of success for relatively older athletes—i.e., those born in the first quarter of the year—compared to younger athletes. But, this effect essentially disappears in adulthood. Similarly, as an under-20, you compete against athletes in a narrow age band; as a senior, you’re conceivably competing against athletes aged 18 to 35.

What predisposes an athlete to success in the junior ranks is not always what drives success at the senior level, says @craig100m. Share on X

Finally, issues such as maturation and time in the sport can drive success at the younger levels, but their influence disappears as athletes transition into the senior ranks. As a result, it’s perhaps not surprising that research suggests the vast majority of top-ranked under-13 and under-15 athletes don’t become elite seniors, and that more than half the athletes who compete at the World Under-20 Championships don’t compete for their country as a senior.

‘Next Big Things’ Meet Injuries, Roadblocks, and Off-Field Issues

Alongside this, we know that injuries rob athletes of their potential. Overuse injuries are a major driver of youth athlete dropout rates, with research in Australian track and field athletes demonstrating that missed training time due to injury or illness is a leading cause of athlete underperformance (a trend that holds true across sports). Just as in football, where a lack of playing time hampers development, exposure to the right level of competition is required to drive development within track and field. In order to progress, athletes have to be challenged just the right amount—enough that it’s tough, driving learning and development, but not so much that the challenge overwhelms the athlete. This means that the athlete is matched to the level of competition.

To me, the dangers of sending an athlete to, say, the World Under-20 Championships if they only just achieve the qualification standard are:

• The experience of being eliminated in the first round will be an overwhelmingly negative experience for them.
• It doesn’t represent the right level of challenge.
• The experience could potentially stagnate their growth.

Conversely, by making things too easy and straightforward for athletes, we prevent them from building the required levels of resilience to support their future success—meaning, we can’t just hand them everything on a plate.

Let’s take a closer look at the influence of injuries on talent development, with an example from Baldi’s book. Fifteen years before Macheda’s debut, Manchester United were in the process of developing a generation of players from their youth academy that would underpin their success for decades. Most famously, this included David Beckham (future England captain), Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes, Gary and Phil Neville, and Nicky Butt—a group of players now commonly termed “The Class of ’92,” based on the year they won the 1992 FA Youth Cup.

One player from that class you probably won’t have heard of is Ben Thornley. Numerous people, including Gary Neville, have stated that Thornley was probably the star of that 1992 Youth team. In 1994, as part of his transition to first-team football, an 18-year old Thornley was playing in a reserve team game against the Blackburn Rovers. Thornley was playing a blinder, having scored two and gotten an assist on another, and United were winning 3-0. The coach wanted to take him off; Thornley, however, was in search of his hat trick and so stayed on.

In the second half, Thornley beat an opposing defender who then made a dangerous, high tackle. His foot made contact with Thornley’s knee, basically destroying it—Thornley tore his cruciate and medial collateral ligaments, along with his hamstring. After surgery and a year of rehabilitation, Thornley made a comeback but was plagued with doubts about how well his knee would hold up to tackles from the opposition. After previously relying on his searing pace, Thornley struggled to regain his pre-injury speed.

Unable to break into the Manchester United first team, he dropped down a division to play for Huddersfield Town, suffering relegation with them in 2001. He then moved to Scotland for a season to play for Aberdeen, before going on to make a small number of appearances for lower league clubs Blackpool and Bury. Just before his 29th birthday, Thornley dropped out of league football for good, ending his career playing for a handful of non-league clubs: a far cry from his much-touted early potential.

Thornley’s experience with injuries is not uncommon among the players profiled in The Next Big Thing. Matt Murray, a former goalkeeper with the Wolverhampton Wanderers, was offered a five-year contract at age 17, a record for the Midlands side. His breakthrough season, 2002–2003, was a huge success, with Murray playing 48 games and being awarded the Man of the Match award in the playoff final, in which the Wolves were promoted to the Premier League.

Over the next three seasons, Murray only played five games due to a plethora of injury issues, including a hernia and a broken foot. The young goalkeeper—then still only 25—strung together 47 games in the 2006–2007 season before breaking his shoulder; while rehabbing that injury, he injured his cruciate ligament. After recovering—again—Murray struggled to get back into the first team and so dropped down a division to play for Hereford United on loan; in his third game there, he ruptured his patella tendon.

Murray never played again professionally—at age 29, he announced his retirement from football. Other players have a similar story; Ally Dick never really recovered from the serious knee injury he suffered at 21, and Lionel Morgan retired at 21 due to persistent knee injuries.

Injuries aren’t the only issue that prevents players from reaching their potential. John Curtis, another former Manchester United player profiled in The Next Big Thing, was touted in the press as a future England captain. Following his professional debut in 1997, Curtis made 14 appearances for Manchester United over a three-year period, his road to regular first-team football blocked by the fact that there were better players ahead of him in the playing rotation. Given the pressure to win at a renowned club like Manchester United, the manager is less likely to risk unproven players when victories are needed.

After dropping down a level—first on loan, then on a permanent transfer—Curtis played almost 100 games in four years, accumulating experience and becoming a solid footballer, going on to play for Leicester and Portsmouth in the Premier League. In Curtis’s case, it is possible that a lack of playing time at a crucial point in his development prevented him from reaching the heights most expected of him. Similarly, Jules Maiorana, who signed for Manchester United from a non-league club, didn’t get on with the manager and so missed valuable playing time before succumbing to a serious knee injury.

In other cases, off-field issues have played a role in players struggling to progress. Danny Cadamarteri burst onto the scene as a striker for Everton, before indiscipline led to the cancellation of a loan he was on to gain first team experience. After this, court cases for assault and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and a positive drug test for pseudoephedrine tempered his development. Andy van der Meyde had an affair, which led to the breakdown of his marriage; his daughter with his new girlfriend was then born with a series illness that required months of hospitalization. Other players such as Cherno Samba, John Bostock, and Owen Price were all the subject of increased media interest and big-money moves on the basis of their perceived talent. Samba, for example, is famous for being a future star in the popular computer game Football Manager, despite starting the game at only 14 years of age.

Keeping Your ‘Next Big Things’ on Track

Macheda’s case and those from the football world aren’t unique; notable examples across sports demonstrate the pitfalls in moving from talented youngster to successful senior. In track and field, for example, in most nations fewer than 50% of the representatives on their Under-20 Championships squad continue on to compete internationally for their country as a senior.

In tennis, Jennifer Capriati burst onto the scene at 14 years of age, before personal problems and injuries prevented her from reaching the heights many thought she was destined for. In American football, Marcus Dupree is often heralded as someone who failed to reach the heights expected of him, leading to an ESPN “30 for 30” film of his story, The Best That Never Was. “Talent” falling short of reaching its potential is nothing new, and yet we should try to understand the reasons why it occurs so that we can—hopefully—reduce the chances of it happening in the future.

Baldi’s profiles of these players who did not quite make it, coupled with research from the field of athlete development, help us learn some key lessons that might assist us in our own coaching practice.

1. What makes a successful young athlete is potentially not the same thing that makes a successful senior athlete. We can’t assume talented youngsters will automatically become talented seniors.

2. Injuries rob athletes of the ability to train and compete at their best. As a result, minimizing injuries through varied practice and adequate loading is crucial.

3. Providing suitable opportunities for athletes to compete at the appropriate level is important. This level should be sufficiently challenging to stimulate growth, but not so challenging that the athlete is out of their depth.

4. Developing athletes/players need to be supported in their holistic development, with psychological ability an important component of the growth of future elite athletes.

5. Given the large role luck plays in the development of athletes, youngsters should be supported in cultivating interests and opportunities outside of the sport, such that if/when they retire, they can more easily transition into normal society.

Developing athletes/players need to be supported in their holistic development, with psychological ability an important component of the growth of future elite athletes, says @craig100m. Share on X

By addressing the points raised above, we can hopefully better support athletes in their development. Because, as Baldi’s book makes clear, the journey from talented youth to successful senior can be fraught with danger—an important lesson for us all.

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