Blog

One of the top questions I get asked in regard to the 1080 Sprint is about workflow. Differing from sled use, the 1080 Sprint provides a significantly enhanced experience over other forms of resisted and assisted training. Since most people are lucky if they have one unit, the question of how many athletes you can get through in a timely manner is always at the forefront of peoples’ minds. We are lucky enough to have two units here (the University of Illinois), but with time restrictions on most practices—whether you are in high school or college—along with most private performance centers having timed slots, it is a very fair question to ask.

The 1080 Sprint utilizes a Microsoft-enabled tablet to run the machine itself. Since it has one tablet per unit, this brings up many questions, such as:

• • Do I need another person to run it?

 

• • How many athletes can you get through the machine at one time?

 

• • How easy is it to move from athlete to athlete?

 

• • How easy is it to digest and utilize date while the athletes are using the machine?

 

While I am not a master of the 1080 Sprint by any means, and my situation is not the same as everyone else’s, I feel like my experiences with the machine and being around other coaches using the machine with varied group sizes and ability levels allow me to confidently answer these questions.

The Setup of the 1080

The setup of the machine itself is relatively easy and takes just one person. I often set up both machines by myself before practice in less than 10 minutes.

The setup of the 1080 Sprint itself is relatively easy and takes just one person. For instance, I often set up both of our machines by myself before practice in less than 10 minutes, says @jake_co. Share on X

The machines are stored in a hard, protective case. Once you take them out of the case, there are two wires that you have to plug in (the power source and the wire for the emergency stop). You then flip a switch, and, assuming you remembered to plug the cord into the outlet, the machine comes on. After this, you grab the tablet, connect it to the machine’s Bluetooth, and open the application on the tablet. I honestly think this is easier than dragging sleds and weights out to the track, and I prefer this to that any day of the week.

Number of Coaches/Employees

I have had anywhere from 1-3 coaches help run the machine(s). It only takes one person to operate the tablet or even tablets in our case with two. After you have loaded all the athlete profiles, which we do before the workout begins, moving between athlete profiles is as simple as one click. Once you have the workout template up, which we start on the athlete’s first rep, tracking reps is really easy.

The software allows you to categorize different workouts and sets and reps within the workout. Moving between resistance or assistance metrics for different athletes is also just another click. While the machine retracts the cord back to the start position, you can make these changes for the athletes. They also have to put on the belt, which provides another few seconds for you to make these changes. We always have some sort of parameters we work within.

Video 1. Simple acceleration is smooth and effective with the 1080 Sprint. Athletes of all sports, not just track, can benefit from motorized resistance.

When we only have one coach available (me), I feel confident personally running the machine and coaching at the same time. The tablet has a connectivity window where you have to be within a certain number of meters of the machine for the tablet to work. I generally sit right behind the machine. While this limits my view and perception within the practice, it offers me a chance to engage more with the athletes. I tend to view practices from the side more often than not, but having a session once per week where I only view them from behind is not a deal-breaker to me.

My athletes like to see everyone’s metrics as well and will hover around me. It’s a unique opportunity to be in the thick of the athletes during their recovery time, says @jake_co. Share on X

My athletes like to see everyone’s metrics as well and will hover around me. It’s a unique opportunity to be in the thick of the athletes during their recovery time and get to hear some things I may not hear when I am on the track or viewing from a different angle. When we have multiple coaches, I generally wander around and view the practice from wherever I deem necessary while I let the other coach run the machine.

Athlete Numbers

As I mentioned before, we are privileged to have two machines for our team. We started with one unit in 2016 and made the move to purchase another unit two years later. I have had anywhere between 3 and 30 athletes at a time whether we had one unit or two.

I will write another article about my favorite workouts to do on the 1080, but what I can tell you here is that with larger groups we tend to use the 1080 as a potentiation or contrast effect. With bigger groups, there obviously will be a waiting period if you just used the 1080, and while I defer to people much smarter than me on the best ways to use resisted or assisted training, a large number of people who use sleds have gone to contrast or potentiation type workouts to begin with.

The benefit of that with the 1080 is completely about flow. Even with a group of 30, if we do a set and rep scheme that involves work on and off the 1080, by the time we account for a reasonable amount of recovery, we end up having kids working seamlessly on and off the 1080. They generally end up lining up, and by the time they get to the front of either line, it’s right at the end of the prescribed recovery time.

We also used some of our older methods of resistance training with the 1080 when we only had one unit. I would throw out a few sleds or weight vests near the 1080 to improve the scheme and workflow within the workout itself. You can get a force-velocity profile with just three different resistance reps, and I have had days where that was all I needed to accomplish, and sleds could fill out the rest. While this is not my favorite thing to do, I can still get some metrics for the day and accomplish what I need to.

Utilizing Feedback from the Machine

Obviously, one of the main benefits of having a 1080 is the metrics you receive from each rep on the machine. Immediately available to you are peak and average speed, power, and force. As a track and field coach who works mainly with sprinters, hurdlers, and horizontal jumpers, power is the main metric that I like to talk about on the 1080 Sprint. Especially during general prep and specific prep, I feel that power development and correct technical models will be the things we ideally want to set up for the foreseeable future.

One of the main benefits of having a 1080 Sprint are the metrics you receive from each rep on the machine. Immediately available to you are peak and average speed, power, and force. Share on X

The power metric itself is what athletes like the most during our early sessions. They very frequently hover behind me and ask to switch over to their workout page to see what the last rep looked like. Our male athletes generally like to see 2,000-watt peak outputs, while our female athletes get pretty excited about anything over 1,000 watts. This creates a great work and practice environment with the athletes. It also feeds right into what I try to do anyway, which is get them to be more powerful.

Due to the athlete’s need for competition and the quick feedback from the machine, we now utilize the feedback in the best way possible to get what we want out of the workout. I will also say, unlike velocity, using the power metric in practice does create a more competitive situation. While my short sprinters will have the fastest times, using the power metric gets kids to ask for more or the right resistance to increase their power output. It levels the playing field and also helps me steer the athletes toward their goals.

Video 2. Dual systems enable the optimal competitive training session, a popularized concept with teams that have two or more 1080 sprints. You can be very creative with individualized sessions for groups and make adjustments on the fly as needed.

As for using the other metrics, they are just as easy to check. I use the average speed and peak speed metrics to make sure we are within whatever percentage I want to be of their top-end speed through the distance we chose. When looking at dosages for volume for the day, I am much more general in the assigned workload because I know I have immediate feedback and metrics to help determine when their day is over.

As mentioned previously, I will have a follow-up article about which workouts I like to use and how, but due to the immediate feedback, I write the workout for the day with a larger difference between minimum and maximum reps. On an acceleration-based 1080 day, you may often see something like 8-12 total reps for that day with some people being stopped immediately at 8 when power output drops, or someone making it all the way to 12 because power and speed were still getting better. The immediate availability of the metrics makes it possible to make these decisions instantaneously.

The immediate availability of the metrics on the 1080 makes it possible for coaches to make these decisions instantaneously. Share on X

Cataloging and Reviewing Metrics

After the workouts are done for the day, there is an option to sync the 1080. I always choose to do this because it sends all the reps from every athlete to the cloud-based website, which then stores all the information under each athlete’s individual profile. Some of the things you can do are significantly easier once the information has synced to the website, and I find it more productive to do them when I have time in my office. Almost everything can be exported to your preferred method of cataloging information, whether that is Microsoft Excel or another software program.

When viewing the information on the website, you can break things down into segments to see the metrics for each rep. I personally like to work in 10-meter segments because that’s how I was taught to find stride length and stride frequency, along with 10-meter segment times being the gold standard in my mind. This, coupled with the ability to plot points to find force-velocity curves, gives you quite a bit to work with to determine what the continuing goals will be for each athlete.

I try to not spend too much time looking at a specific individual rep or even one session so I don’t get lost in the fact that the athlete could have just had a good or bad day. Having information stored from years, though, helps create a unique looking glass to see back into the past. I often go back and look at sessions from previous years at the same time in the training calendar to decide if we are on the right path or if I’m missing something. Going from one year to another is as simple as one click. This offers a truly unique ability to have quantifiable information easily accessible at all times.

Differences in Assisted vs. Resisted Workflow

While most of the information I have talked about so far has been through the lens of resisted work sessions, there do tend to be some differences when athletes perform an assisted or overspeed session. For simplicity’s sake, when we do assisted or overspeed sessions, I tend to not record the data in individual profiles. I know a lot of people who do, but when we do these sessions, I have already made decisions about the top-end velocity I want them to reach, or how long I want them to be towed distance-wise from the standpoint of assisted speed.

I am more likely to actually track the things I need to in these particular sessions through alternative means (video for foot contact time, Freelap cones for 10-meter splits, etc.). In these sessions, I usually pull up a random profile, tune the machine to the resistance I want that athlete pulled at for the start of the rep, set the zero point for the machine to stop pulling (I usually use at least 20 meters before they reach the machine), and just change the top speed it will pull to depending on the athlete. The benefit of this goes back to timeliness. I now accomplish everything I need to without adding any extra steps.

A Higher Level

The 1080 Sprint gives you the ability to take your assisted and resisted workouts to a level that its predecessors could not achieve, says @jake_co. Share on X

Overall, the 1080 Sprint’s workflow is very easy to navigate. With many options and solutions to look at depending on your situation, I think it is easy to see the many benefits available to users and the coaches behind the scenes. While it can seem like a daunting task compared to just throwing some sleds or weight vests on the track and telling your athletes to get to work, the tool itself provides the ability to take your assisted and resisted workouts to a level that could not be achieved by its predecessors.

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 this article I will outline the approach used in technique analysis with Finnish national swimming teams. The senior team usually consists of approximately 20 swimmers, among whom there are currently a medalist from the World Championships and several medalists in European Championships. In this mix there are several athletes hoping to take the next step to international elite level, while the junior teams are composed of 20-25 promising swimmers between the ages of 15 and 17 years old.

I’ve been working as a technique analyst for both senior and junior national teams in Finnish Swimming since 2013. My job is to provide feedback on national team camps through biomechanical analysis to give athletes and coaches information on each swimmer’s strengths and weaknesses as related to international level performance. In my time as a technique analyst for those teams, we have used video, speed measurements, and Trainesense SmartPaddles as tools to analyze a swimmer’s performance. Of these tools, the SmartPaddle is the newest addition to our arsenal.

The Trainesense SmartPaddle measures hand force, hand speed, and the direction of the force in water, which provides us with useful information about our athletes’ strengths & weaknesses. Share on X

The Trainesense SmartPaddle measures hand force, hand speed, and the direction of the force in water, which provides us with useful information about our athletes’ strengths and weaknesses. Traditionally, power in water has been measured with a wire attached to the swimmer’s hip—thus giving the total force produced by the swimmer’s movements—but there hasn’t been an easy way to go into details regarding which parts of the swimmer’s stroke produce that power and which parts should be further developed to swim even faster. Using SmartPaddle, we have access to all that data.

As a part of our validation process with the SmartPaddle, we measured both hand forces and swimming speed simultaneously to see the interplay of force and velocity. In figure 1 below, there is an example of a swimmer’s hand force and speed. This graph clearly shows that there is a connection between the force measured from the hands and a swimmer’s speed in freestyle swimming.

It’s also interesting to note that there is a 0.1-0.2 second delay between force increase and velocity increase. This added mass effect is evident in all movement, but I believe that in swimming it is one of the key reasons why swimming fast is so difficult for most people. It takes time for a human body to accelerate in water, meaning propulsive force in a single stroke should be exerted for 0.4-0.6 seconds per stroke to reach high velocities. This requires some patience and is somewhat counterintuitive if you consider that in human natural locomotion (sprint running), the ground contact time is only 0.1 seconds.

In essence, swimmers need to learn to hold onto the water long enough to accelerate the body forward and fight their natural, land-based habit of producing force as explosively as possible.

Thus, a continuous propulsive force phase of 0.4-0.6 seconds per stroke, where most of the power is directed back toward the swimmer’s feet, is one of the parameters that I check first during our national team camps since it’s one of the most fundamental aspects of swimming fast. This applies to freestyle, backstroke, and butterfly. However, in the breaststroke, less force is produced backward due to the sculling motions prevalent in the breaststroke pull.

Limiting Factors for Creating Force in the Water

It is kind of surprising how many swimmers can’t produce a consistent propulsive force during the stroke. This uninterrupted force production phase requires an ability to sense small changes of pressure in the palm of the hand and forearm, as well as the ability to control the force produced by the swimming muscles. In my experience, these two components are the main ingredients for a good feel for the water, and they should be trained accordingly.

The abilities to sense small changes of pressure in the palm and forearm and to control the force produced by the swimming muscles are the main ingredients for a good feel for the water. Share on X

Some common difficulties in producing propulsive force in freestyle are:

• • Exerting too much of the force downward instead of back toward the feet.

 

• • Muscling through the stroke, so that the swimmer produces a lot of power in the beginning of the stroke, but the force tapers off too fast. (This results in too short of an impulse for accelerating the body forward.)

 

The first problem is usually seen in swimmers with a lot of upper body strength and/or bad shoulder and thoracic spine mobility. Pushing down in the beginning of the stroke increases the feeling of pressure in the palm and forearm, giving the swimmer a feeling of a powerful stroke. However, most of the force is used to lift the swimmer’s upper body higher in the water instead of moving forward faster. This downward push is also detrimental to shoulder health and can lead to injury. Poor mobility leads to a similar technique error due to difficulties in keeping the hand in a streamlined position after the entry.

It is worth noting that in SmartPaddle data, the best swimmers usually produce a little force downward in the beginning of the stroke as well, but the magnitude of the force is small. With good swimmers, it seems their hands are active after entry into the water, but excessive downward push is avoided.

The second issue is typical in swimmers with good endurance, but little patience. The problem is that they accelerate their hands too fast in the beginning of the stroke. After this aggressive catch, hand speed usually starts slowing down mid-stroke, resulting in a loss of pressure in the hand and, consequently, the loss of propulsive force as well. This early force peak in the stroke leads to too short of an impulse to accelerate the body forward optimally.

The graph showing force and velocity curves also has an interesting detail just after the one-second mark (highlighted by an arrow in the picture). Here, the swimmer’s stroke has produced similar force as the prior stroke, but the gain in speed is less than it had been previously. Intrigued by this, I checked the video to see a reason for the discrepancy and found that during that particular stroke, the swimmer was breathing, and his kick was too wide to balance the breathing action. Thus, the increased resistance during breathing negated some of the work done in that stroke.

This specific detail in that one swimmer’s performance data highlighted a fundamental law of swimming for me:

• • Backward force created by the hands increases forward velocity unless increased resistance due to technical errors negates it.

 

If the data shows a consistent force production phase that lasts long enough, and the swimmer produces high enough peak forces but the swimming speed is still lacking, the usual reason is that the swimmer is creating too much drag. Therefore, every now and then it is a good idea to supplement SmartPaddle use with underwater video to determine whether the swimmer’s body position or limb movements produce unnecessary drag.

Every now and then it is a good idea to supplement SmartPaddle use with underwater video to determine whether the swimmer’s body position or limb movements produce unnecessary drag. Share on X

Using Force Data to Assess Performance

Coaching literature commonly highlights the importance of accelerating the hand throughout the stroke. In fact, difficulty in smoothly accelerating the hand is usually the reason why a swimmer is unable to produce force consistently through the underwater part of the stroke. The graph below details both hand speed and hand force.

From this graph, force levels clearly start to drop off as soon as hand velocity decreases in the pull. Even if the swimmer’s hand starts accelerating again after a slow phase, the forces produced during this second fast part are less than those produced in one smooth, accelerating stroke. Therefore, smooth hand acceleration in the underwater part of the stroke is one of the factors I look for in the SmartPaddle data when evaluating a swimmer’s performance.

The difficulties in maintaining steady pressure on the hand by accelerating it throughout the stroke are, in my opinion, partly caused by the way swimming is taught. Coaches and analysts (myself included) love to talk about different phases in the stroke to highlight certain key positions—for example, the high elbow position in freestyle. Even though these positions are important, coaches should take into consideration that from the point of view of hand acceleration and force, the transitions from one phase to the next are usually where we see a drop in hand velocity and force. Thus, concentrating heavily on the correct execution of one part of the stroke can be detrimental to executing the whole stroke with correct hand acceleration—and this tendency should be countered with enough skill training where the focus is the whole stroke as one fluid motion.

Addressing Left-Right Asymmetries

One interesting aspect of swimming performance that we can monitor with the SmartPaddle is the difference between left- and right-hand strokes. It has been previously reported that 50% of top-level swimmers (FINA points classification over 900 points, meaning roughly top 10 in World Championships) participating in one study had significant left-right asymmetry in their freestyle strokes.¹ Fixing some of this asymmetry seems like a promising way to improve performance, even with elite-level swimmers.

In technique analysis, this left-right difference is sometimes visible in the video, but usually only with less skilled athletes. Side differences can also be evaluated through velocity measurements in freestyle and backstroke if the system used is precise enough. However, with a velocity-based method, you can’t be sure whether any speed discrepancy between the left and right side is due to a force difference between the respective hand strokes or a different level of drag during those strokes.

Without the SmartPaddle, there isn’t an easy way to verify left-right force asymmetry in butterfly and breaststroke. Share on X

Additionally, without the SmartPaddle, there isn’t an easy way to verify left-right force asymmetry in butterfly and breaststroke. For example, I have previously seen a significant hand force asymmetry in a breaststroker who is a medalist in World Championships. Without the force data, we wouldn’t have had any way of knowing this is the case.

When trying to identify and fix significant left-right asymmetry in swimming, there a few things to take into consideration:

 

1. 1. It is natural that some level of difference will remain, due to strength difference between the dominant and non-dominant side.

 

1. 1. Also, especially in freestyle, the technique usually isn’t totally symmetrical due to breathing action. It is quite common that the stroke executed to the breathing side is stronger due to hip and shoulder rotation assisting in force production.

 

Despite these factors, in my experience it is fairly common to have simple and fixable asymmetries in a swimmer’s stroke. Sometimes these issues arise from a faulty movement pattern and are clearly technical in nature. There are, however, many cases where swimmers have difficulties activating latissimus dorsi or scapular muscles. Therefore, it’s a good idea to conduct regular screening by physiotherapists to identify and correct such muscle activation issues.

From Technical Analysis to Results in the Pool

In this article, I have outlined my way of analyzing swimming technique with SmartPaddles. In essence, I look for sufficiently long force production time and smoothly accelerating hand speed in both hands.

With national teams, I supplement SmartPaddle data with speed data and video to give as objective a view of an athlete’s technique as I can. After that, we look at the data and videos together with the athlete and the coach to find ways to improve. For example, with one junior national team athlete, based on the data and the videos, we have been going for a shallower trajectory for the right hand since his too-deep stroke pattern made him lose propulsive force in the latter half of the stroke. During this process, we have observed a 17-centimeter increase in stroke length in one year and corresponding increase in submaximal swimming speed, and we’re excited to see how this translates to performance in upcoming meets.

In processes like this, I find SmartPaddle and speed data crucial, since everyone (including me) has their own ideas of how to go forward, but measurable facts are the thing keeping us on the right track.

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. Formosa D., Mason B., and Burkett B. “The force–time profile of elite front crawl swimmers.” Journal of Sports Sciences. May 2011; 29(8): 811–819.

Injuries are an unfortunate, yet naturally occurring, part of the competitive process in sporting activities. Ankles will roll, ACLs will tear, and shoulders will separate no matter what we do. These things happen, and yet countless “injury prevention programs” falsely claim that they have the answer to ensure nobody will suffer the unfortunate consequences competition can bring. Newsflash: If you truly want to ensure an athlete never gets injured again, tell them not to play the sport—otherwise, you have to accept that there are always inherent risks and do your best to reduce them.

Personally, I am a die-hard believer that in order to get your athletes to perform at a high level and remain healthy, they must get strong. Not everybody needs to squat 600 pounds, but they should be able to move through key movements (squatting, hinging, pressing, etc.) with adequate technique and eventually under load. When they can’t do these things, they are at a greater risk for injury.

When they can’t do these things is also when corrective exercise is of particular importance. Although it does assist in the injury reduction process, the greatest benefit of corrective exercises lies in keeping athletes well equipped to strength train properly (which is perhaps one of the best injury reduction tools of all). These exercises are critical to the safety and health of an athlete, which ultimately underpins their performance potential: A broken athlete will never succeed.

Although it does assist in the injury reduction process, the greatest benefit of corrective exercises lies in keeping athletes well equipped to strength train properly, says @jimmypritchard_. Share on X

I know that a number of coaches will roll their eyes at the overly saturated “corrective exercise” niche market that has come to life today and balk at the idea of another movement screen predicting when and how their athletes will get injured. That is not the point I wish to debate. I wholeheartedly believe that there is no one-size-fits-all movement screen or particular way of correcting movement dysfunctions. I do, however, believe that corrective exercise is an integral piece of any successful training program aimed at attacking the weak points or deficiencies an athlete may have, so they can get back to what matters most: training.

If coaches take a proactive rather than reactive approach to addressing their athletes’ movement dysfunctions and inadequacies, they will find less time lost to nagging chronic injuries, coupled with greater performance outputs.

Where to Start

Selecting and implementing proper corrective exercises for the task at hand requires a coach’s eye and an understanding of how athletes may respond to any given movement. There are suggested frameworks from which we can find starting places with our athletes to begin correcting dysfunctional movement, but the key will always be to adjust on an individual “needs” basis. Identifying and prescribing these exercises is one thing but implementing them is another. Not only is it clear that corrective exercise is important, so too is the manner with which we implement it.

Eric D’Gati was the presenter/coach at the FMS level 2 course I attended four years ago, and he had one of the most useful perspectives I’ve ever heard a coach take regarding corrective exercise. He discussed it as an art, while the ability to implement it in a strength and conditioning program represents a true skill. We must be able to provide our athletes and clients with all of the appropriate exercises while improving their movement, but most importantly, addressing their goals!

Corrective exercise is simply a means to improve movement capabilities, thereby reducing the likelihood for injury and enhancing the toolbox of movements we can prescribe in a training program. Never—and I repeat, never—should a performance program turn into an exclusive corrective exercise program.

A football player who comes to us hoping to increase his 225-pound bench press for maximum reps and improve his 40-yard dash time for the NFL Combine needs a heavy dose of accelerative speed and strength endurance work. If the same athlete has a poor squatting pattern and hip mobility issues, we will surely address those—but in no way will we ever completely prioritize that over the goal of improving his needed performance qualities. What we would do instead is select exercises that we know he can safely execute to improve his targeted athletic qualities, while supplementing with corrective exercises.

One of the biggest mistakes I see coaches make when attempting to implement corrective exercise is allowing it to take precedence over the athlete’s goals despite their best intentions. Share on X

One of the biggest mistakes I see coaches make when attempting to implement corrective exercise is allowing it to take precedence over the athlete’s goals despite their best intentions. Coaches who do so will quickly discover that they no longer have clients to train, for they are not working toward their clients’ goals. Building performance and improving movement quality simultaneously is possible, and one could argue that by improving movement, we are also improving performance.

Implementation Strategies

Once coaches recognize the importance of corrective exercise in their programs, they often wonder how to effectively implement it without disrupting or detracting from the overarching themes of the program. While it may be a daunting task at first, incorporating these movements is quite easy and can be done in a multitude of ways.

1. Rest Intervals

One of my favorite methods of introducing a corrective exercise into a program is to have my athletes or clients do them between sets of compound strength and power exercises that require rest intervals.

If one of my athletes completes a heavy set of five front squats and also needs work on their ankle mobility, I will have them do their banded dorsiflexion stretches for the prescribed repetitions during their rest period. This kills two birds with one stone and is a huge help for athletes who already may be strapped for time but need to get multiple things in at once. Add in the fact that these exercises will likely enhance the performance of the intended movement we are training, and it becomes a clear no-brainer.

Video 1. Between sets of an exercise like a front squat, athletes can incorporate individualized corrective exercises.

2. Warm-Up

An obvious but effective time to implement corrective exercises is during the initial stages of the workout or during a warm-up. Most of these movements do not require a significant load, nor will they tax the athlete in any way that will harm their performance. If I have athletes who struggle with single-leg stability, but I know I’ve prescribed them some lower limb unilateral work for the day, I will often have them do hurdle work in their warm-up. In these exercises, they must step over and under hurdles while maintaining solid posture to get everything in the hips, knee, ankles, feet, and core firing properly.

3. Cooldown

Similar to the warm-up, the cooldown is another obvious place to implement corrective exercises because there is no fear this will detract from the remainder of the program. While I prefer to implement corrective exercises both intra-workout and in the warm-up as opposed to during the cooldown, I find this period an excellent opportunity to address any underlying mobility issues. During the cooldown, we can do extensive levels of static stretching in order to improve nagging areas that we need to address without the fear of it comprising our force-generating capacity, as we know that we certainly don’t want to do this before or during a workout.

4. Rest Day or Extra Mini Session

While I like to consolidate the work I prescribe my athletes as much as possible, one last method for implementing corrective exercise is through an extra session, planned either on a training day or a rest day. As previously mentioned, the load for the majority of these movements is rather insignificant in terms of stress, so it is highly unlikely that athletes will become fatigued from them. For that reason, a coach could execute an entire corrective exercise session on a rest day, or even as a second session at some point after the completion of their other regularly scheduled conditioning session.

This can be a particularly useful method when an athlete requires a significant amount of corrective exercise work and simply cannot fit it all into the main session without that dragging on too long. In that case, the athlete would benefit from a separate, shorter session focusing on correctives. For example, an athlete may struggle with core stability, bracing, and anti-rotation, so they may benefit from a circuit that includes exercises such as a half kneeling dowel lift.

Putting It All Together

Remember, in order to reduce injuries, athletes must be able to move effectively and train hard, building a solid anatomical foundation. Corrective exercise serves as a supplementary tool to assist with dysfunctional movement and ensure we address issues before they get out of hand. There are a multitude of ways to implement corrective exercises into a program, and a coach must develop the artistic form to insert them into their athlete’s program where they best see fit.

There are a multitude of ways to implement corrective exercises into a program, and a coach must develop the artistic form to insert them into their athlete’s program where they best see fit. Share on X

Coaches should never compromise performance training programs in order to create exclusive corrective exercise programs; rather, they should use assessment tools to guide their exercise selections toward intelligent movements that their athletes can safely execute while attempting to concurrently improve their movement competency. If corrective exercise simply doesn’t seem “worth the squeeze” or appears too time-consuming, think about how much time will be wasted when an injury occurs. If coaches can take a proactive approach to their athletes’ movement ability (and dysfunctions) rather than a reactionary one, they will have a better chance of achieving continual progress and successful performance.

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

References

1. Cook, G. Movement: Functional Movement Systems: Screening, Assessment, Corrective Strategies. On Target Publications. 2010.

2. Patel, K. Corrective Exercise: A Practical Approach. Routledge. 2014.

3. Sherrington, C., Tiedemann, A., Fairhall, N., Close, J. C. T., and Lord, S. R. “Exercise to prevent falls in older adults: an updated meta-analysis and best practice recommendations. New South Wales Public Health Bulletin. 2011;22(3-4):78-83.

I’ve written before about the compressed triphasic system I use with fighters or any athlete peaking for singular events. This is an idiosyncratic approach to applying the triphasic method to MMA fighters; hopefully there were lessons others could glean from marrying an intensive method to an athlete, which leads to a lot of complexity for strength and conditioning coaches. But the fundamental lesson is how we can achieve our desired outcomes in an environment that is chaotic and ever-changing.

The fundamental lesson is how we can achieve our desired outcomes in an environment that is chaotic and ever-changing, says @WSWayland. Share on X

The limits of block sequence and linear periodization systems mean that for prolonged periods of the training year, we cannot utilize highly qualitative training instances to improve specific qualities and that often a mixed modalities approach means some qualities can end up being undertrained. The triphasic system’s rigidity bumped up against my reality of needing condensed models, like with MMA or grappling, versus flexible models accounting for higher degrees of variability.

Most of what we are taught in strength and conditioning is a series of small-world models that are sequentially lined up to build what looks like a coherent long-term strategy. In Mladen Jovanovic’s book, he suggests “We must be cautious in applying small-world, scientific, optimal ‘truths’ to the real world of athlete development.”

Puzzles vs. Mosaics

Good strength and conditioning practice is a gestalt of sorts, with the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. Much of the theory is based on lining those parts up to achieve a desired training effect or optimal athlete state. Top-down strength and conditioning strategies such as block linear-style periodization are often like jigsaw puzzles, with neatly designed interlocking pieces. They’re complex, it takes time to put the pieces together, and if you lose one piece, it ruins the puzzle. Or to take this analogy to a Jenga puzzle, take away enough pieces and it falls down, or it is easy to knock over when external forces act upon it. Degrees of variability are what cause issues for top-down or small-world thinking.

One solution I have grown fond of is to take more of a mosaic strategy approach than a puzzle one. Mosaic warfare, from which the strategic idea borrows its name, is a multi-domain, combined arms warfare conducted in parallel over wide areas, at machine speeds that cognitively overwhelm a linear adversary. The basic idea is more flexible and adaptable than monolithic systems and rigid architectures. If a small part is taken out by the opposition, it does not render the whole useless. Mosaic FOREX trading, for instance, is a diversification strategy that traders use to spread risk.

When a puzzle loses a piece, it’s clear that a piece is missing, and the replacement needs to be an exact copy of that specific size, shape, and color. A mosaic strategic approach uses a palette of broken tiles of different shapes and sizes to build something ordered. If you break or lose a piece, there are many like it that you can use as a replacement to complete the picture. Up close—let’s say a few inches away—a mosaic looks like a mess, but as you draw out, it builds a large, clear image.

To a strength and conditioning coach or a sports coach, those broken or missing pieces could appear as an acute injury affecting this week’s training plan, a lack of equipment, a flat battery on a piece of technology, a viral pandemic, or a losing streak for an athlete, causing an upheaval in circumstance. Mosaic strategy asks what we can use to fill that hole that may not be exactly the same color, size, and shape as the original piece, but at a distance match the perceived whole. The opportunity also exists to piece together new effects on the fly.

The key point to this is that different capabilities from different domains operate on different time scales. Strength and conditioning coaches get a unique insight into athlete readiness—psychology that the sports coach, nutritionist, physiotherapist, or sports med (and vice versa) might all miss, as these different domains operate on different time scales and information sets.

Making the Most of the Unknown

The unknowns you will encounter obviously depend on the types of athletes you work with. If you work in a conventional team sport, you probably have a regular team calendar and regular access to team training facilities, so you can plan for athletes around regular season games, athlete readiness, and training residuals.

In my own situation, an athlete will sometimes come to a training session without my having ever met them. Not knowing their capabilities, this requires a bottom-up approach that satisfies the principles of training rather than any long-term speculative modeling or planning. Barbell sport athletes, for instance, have the most rigidity in their preparation, usually working in the same training space while having minimal variables to deal with. It is interesting that the athletes with the fewest variables and most rigid and least plastic training approaches should inform the orthodox training approach the rest of us are encouraged to take.

It is interesting that the athletes with the fewest variables and most rigid training approaches should inform the orthodox training approach the rest of us are encouraged to take. Share on X

Nonuniform waving between rigidity (our whole mosaic) and plasticity (the ability to change pieces) in our approach is key to making this work. Trying to plan this type of training from the top down doesn’t work; you just have to plan accordingly so that the training dose occurs often enough to maintain training effect. You need to use collaboration with the athlete along with your best judgment to decide when the time is right—what is known as “sprint and release” programming.

Sprint and release programming is an approach I have borrowed from Mladen Jovanovic. An iterative model, as Mladen explains, consists of “three time-frames: release, phase and sprint, each having a planning component, development component, and review & retrospective component (which are needed to update the knowledge for the next iteration). Why did I choose different names? To act smart? First of all, different frameworks demand different language. Second of all, planning in this framework, as opposed [to] contemporary planning strategies, is iterative rather than detailed up-front. Taking all of that into account, it is essential to use the terminology which will better represent the iterative planning approach and differentiate it from more common planning strategies as well.”

Mladen has used terminology largely synonymous with Silicon Valley tech start-ups. The process, however, is a simple one: Release a product, reflect on it, release another, rinse, and repeat. Rather than plan out a detailed process from top to bottom, have a release strategy guided by principle, a phase strategy guided by refinement, and a sprint strategy guided by pragmatism. Release, in this case, is my mosaic, and sprints are the interchangeable pieces.

Well, what does this have to do with triphasic concepts or microdosing? Below I will explain how I’ve taken this conceptual framework and applied it to my approach with loading, moving from macro planning to micro day-to-day workouts.

Iterative Triphasic, Microdosing, and Training Half-Life

The strategy with the release, phase, sprint approach lies in iterative dosing of the right individual qualities expressed across sprints. It’s not as structured as year-round planning, and not as frequent as the microdosed approach that inspired this thinking.

The idea is that if we microdose the right high-return individual qualities, we can use them to build upon a sustained training effect for the subsequent training phases and sprints. Derek M. Hansen borrowed this nomenclature from the world of doping, and I’m paraphrasing it: the strategic use of exogenous testosterone by athletes to sustain elevated testosterone levels just under the allowable testosterone-to-epitestosterone ratio of 4 to 1. So, to keep this ratio up, the athletes would regularly microdose small amounts to pass testing.

The idea is that if we microdose the right high-return individual qualities, we can use them to build upon a sustained training effect for the subsequent training phases and sprints. Share on X

Proper use of a microdosing program means we can kick the can of training qualities a bit further down the road and employ proper residuals. This is the beauty of microdosing with occasional supramaximal or submaximal training.

Do not get too hung up on semantics here, as it is not really microdosing in the true sense. I started using the phrase “iterative dosing,” which then became iterative triphasic (IT). What sort of training am I approaching in each sprint/phase iteration? Well, in this case, making the most of supramaximal effects. Does it have to be triphasic? No. Does it have to be supramaximal? No. Use whatever intensive iteration of your own model you want. I am just laying out mine, based off a model I’ve used extensively.

Why would I want to dose heavy eccentrics or supramaximal work in season?

There are several acute physiological changes that supramaximal training forces on the body, which is the biggest justification for this method and the same justification for trying to fit in intensive strategy in season. I talk about this in my squat article for SimpliFaster. 

“Reconciling these benefits (of heavy strength training) with an athlete who may have a busy schedule and high training volumes can be tricky for coaches. We can, however, manipulate things a little to provide intensity, keep volumes appropriate, and make changes to minimize technical aberrations. The key is to apply stress in a fashion that yields benefits and mitigates drawbacks. If this has to bend orthodoxy slightly, then so be it. We can provide this in the form of derivatives, clever rep schemes, and load manipulation.”

Having a smart iterative plan that allows for the implementation of intensive methods when needed would be an addition to derivatives, rep schemes, and load manipulation, but you need to be able to justify it. I’m not shy about trying to integrate intensive methods and heavy barbell work in season and, in general, as part of my long-term training principle.

The physiological and neurological response from supramaximal training is enormous. It kicks tissue remodeling and neural changes into overdrive. We see improvements in maximal muscle recruitment and maximal fast twitch recruitment and even the potential for very controversial hyperplasia.

Why would I want to microdose heavy eccentrics in season?

The key points are these:

• Eccentric training can improve muscle mechanical function to a greater extent than other modalities.
• Novel muscle-tendon unit adaptations associated with a faster (i.e., explosive) phenotype have been reported.
• Eccentric training may be especially beneficial in enhancing strength, power, and speed performance.
• Increased stiffness of titin isoforms.
• Robustness.

I’ve said before that, ostensibly, an athlete could derive an enormous amount of structural and strength benefit from just eccentric-focused supramaximal training, but muscle action is a three-part process.

Why would I want to microdose heavy isometrics in season?

• Greater tissue adaptation.
• Muscle fibers are fired and re-fired throughout the duration of the repetition to the greatest extent with supramaximal loads, even though no movement occurs.
• Maximizes the free energy that is transferred throughout every dynamic muscle contraction and the SSC.
• Second order benefits, like peripheral BP and bracing.
• Robustness.

In both of these methods, the key effect is that optionality of robustness. By taking the time to insert these phases into training, their benefits help form the foundation for future training cycles and help me get the most out of our freer form of training design. Back to our earlier analogy: I like to think of robustness as the bonding agent that holds our mosaic together.

The type of iterative intervention we use matters because the repeat bout effect of supramaximal training, for instance, can be effective at yielding long-term protective effects better than prophylactics. As the old adage goes, a little intensive short-term suffering is preferable to prolonged low-level suffering.

This type of microdosing is not the same as, say, the sprint microdosing set out by Hansen, which would have near-daily frequency. Keep in mind that with supramaximal work you might only do this 1-2 times a year as part of a conventional 16- to 20-week intensive off-season program. What I suggest is a frequent dosing of 4-, 8-, and 10-week intervals. Compared to just, for instance, once a year, these are still a lot more dosages.

Why dose training this way? Supramaximal residuals are long and punctuated often enough throughout a trainer year as various phases and iterations can keep conferring benefits for a prolonged period. The point is that the benefits of this type of rigid structured training are numerous, so we have to insert it into our planning somewhere.

The point is that the benefits of this type of rigid structured training are numerous, so we have to insert it into our planning somewhere, says @WSWayland. Share on X

The compressed method means we can aim for 4-, 2-, or even 1-week blocks when the opportunity arises. For those forced into 2-week training windows, you can look at choosing between eccentrics or isometric stimulus depending on what the athlete needs to work on. You can employ a lower-quality mixed approach that merges both eccentrics and isometrics into the same working rep (eccentric iso’s). This comes with the drawback of being energetically demanding and, as a result, it will be much less qualitative than training eccentrics or isometrics as singular target qualities. This, in turn, gives us time to employ a submaximal approach during or between dose weeks.

The stronger the athlete, the more variability we can get away with and less residual loss we will see. I will set out how we go from phase to sprint planning, down to the individual workouts, to give you a sense of what I am getting at. I abhor when coaches lay out fancy strategic models without showing how they actually execute them from whiteboard to rack. To quote Nassim Taleb: “It’s easier to macro bullshit than it is to micro bullshit.”

Ideal Facility Week

For the extremely time-poor, when implementing in season is impractical, try to fit two doses within the week. I sometimes do this to give me and the athlete more time before the next time we need to dose. I have used the strategy below in golf, but it could also work well in baseball.

The above situation dictates our strategy on the day we scout our facility. A lot of my struggle with the triphasic system or any block system is its first contact with reality. The bottom-up approach and agile decision-making work well for me with athletes who travel; however, if you want to apply it to athletes who play regular season games and have a known base of operation, you can take whichever approach suits. Conversely, you could use the same approach if an athlete is at a “home base” facility before traveling off again.

Below is a regular training week I’ve implemented in season for an athlete who preferred an upper low split across a seven-day week.

The Training Week and Within Week Variability and Using Data to Inform OODA Loops

“Variable weeks” speak not only to equipment variability, which is a very possible scenario for me with athletes, but also variability in readiness. This increasing mix of subjective and objective measures is starting to creep into the training environment, empowering the athlete to shift the ever-changing pieces of their physical state. This could be HRV scores, subjective questionnaires, dialogue, or velocity-based measures. This where interoperability—for instance, information sharing—is a super important aspect of the mosaic approach, as at its heart, athlete preparation is not just strength and conditioning but an interdisciplinary practice. A crucial element in this thinking is the “speed” of adaptability to a changing situation, not just paying lip service to the concept.

An increasing mix of subjective & objective measures is starting to creep into the training environment, empowering the athlete to shift the ever-changing pieces of their physical state. Share on X

We have more data solutions than ever, which means we can adapt to variable circumstances but also track solutions. We feed this information into an OODA loop, which stands for observe–orient–decide–act. This is a type of decision cycle developed by military strategist and United States Air Force Colonel John Boyd that is also used in business, litigation, and law enforcement.

A lot of coaches may perform elements of this as part of their normal practice. I was first introduced to an OODA loop as an agility concept for athletes; an implicit strategy for not actually being the most agile, but having the ability to disrupt an opponent’s OODA loop, using fake movement, etc. I use OODA loops as part of my process of choosing how to approach a sprint based on the data I have available.

“A key part of this is distinguishing the relevant from the insignificant, and this will be based upon a number of factors including experience. This ability to interpret information is critical as all the information in the world is of no use unless it can be interpreted. The Decision phase then involves deciding on a course of action and selecting one path, and the Action phase will then carry out this decision. Performance is therefore dependent on the effective development and execution of each phase, and a weakness in any will reveal itself as a limit to performance.” (from Performance Management That Makes a Difference: An Evidence-Based Approach)

Having a decision-making framework of some sort is crucial because there is no excuse for winging it. The busy work coach, the spontaneous exercise inventor, and the drill-them-’til- they’re-dead coach are the sorts who put deciding and acting above the crucial skills of observing and orienting.

Sprint Planning

Individual session design should be a straightforward affair using an OODA loop.

Session design for my in-season (or offseason) planned triphasic sessions is fairly straightforward: Rather than applying triphasic means to as many exercises as is appropriate, we apply the triphasic stimulus to the movement that will get us the most return, second order benefit, and residual. This is usually the movement that starts the session. Part of the selection is informed by athlete preference and equipment availability.

Rather than applying triphasic means to as many exercises as is appropriate, we apply the triphasic stimulus to the movement that will get us the most return, second order benefit, and residual. Share on X

Micro planning for your triphasic days can also require adaptability. Because many athletes I work with now have variable training environments, my triphasic approach must account for that variability. If they have safety bars or trap bars, we can employ a near (90%+) or semi supramaximal approach within a training week when the opportunity presents itself— it is a training feast-and-famine approach. The beauty is that the more you and the athlete do this, the easier it becomes.

The session planning or decision-making itself is where the craftsmanship qualities of a coach get to shine. The aim should be brilliance in subtlety, objective measures informing coach decision-making—basic exercises with tweaks in joint angles, force velocity relationship, and TUT that provide just enough specificity for the needs of the individual but also are able to adapt to variable situations.

Programs should be aesthetic. I am a big believer that if it looks good, it is good, and most good coaches can intuit this just by looking at a program and its intent. Programs should be minimal or at least meet the idea of another Mladen principle I like: minimal viable performance (MVP)—is it enough to achieve our immediate aims? It should have enough context and be easy to understand, it should match the thrust of intent in order to fit even roughly into our overall picture. To bring it back to my earlier metaphor, these are elements that make the mosaic.

Here is an example of an ideal week that allows us to employ intensive dosing.

We can boil this down further into an ideal scenario versus non-ideal scenario for our agile weeks. I outlined a little of the plan A, B, C thinking in my tips for golfers post. Below is a suggestion for approaching that day 1 scenario based on whether you’ve had to adapt to an optimal or suboptimal scenario using an OODA loop.

This where we move away from our structured triphasic sprints; we have to implement what is, in effect, a form of adaptive planning based on circumstance. This is a commonality for athletes based in touring sports like golf, tennis, motorsport, etc. Either way, training IS happening.

Observe the training facility or lack thereof— what does it have: barbells, racks, trap bar, med balls, etc.? Orient based on what the athlete needs. Strength? Ballistics? Hypertrophy? Decide by merging the last two together. How do I use this to embrace the challenges I am facing today? Then finally act and execute the training plan based on these.

Could I Dose Intensive Work More Regularly?

Using supramaximal eccentric or isometric means that dose volume and frequency would be lower, whereas the submaximal method would have a less pronounced and prolonged effect but could be based more frequently. A lot of frequency is dictated by training age, athlete competency, and also buy-in to the approach. So, an intensive submaximal compressed method would look like this (repeat throughout the year):

While I am trying to articulate a very fluid approach, I have found that the more very experienced coaches I talk to, the more they seem to operate in this fashion, usually as an expression of implicit knowledge. The other big caveat to this is that, at least initially, most athletes may need to start their training in a very rigid sense. Then, as training age accumulates, it gives them the solid foundation upon which abstraction can be built.

The key to this approach being successful is using a pragmatic decision-making process like an OODA loop, and it becoming a long-term iterative process of refinement across repeat applications of releases and phases. I am not naive enough to believe this approach will work for everyone, but it is an approach that has recently served my own idiosyncratic circumstances very well.

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

Jeffries, I. “Agility training for team sports – running the OODA loop.” Professional Strength & Conditioning. 2016;42:15-21.

Munger, C.N., Archer, D.C., Leyva, W.D., et al. “Acute effects of eccentric overload on concentric squat performance.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2017;31(5):1192-1197.

Wirth, K., Keiner, M., Szilvas, E., Hartmann, H., Sander, A., Wirth. “Effects of eccentric strength training on different maximal strength and speed-strength parameters of the lower extremity.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2015;29(7):1837-1845.

It’s no secret that acceleration capabilities and sprint speed are sought-after qualities for many field- and court-based sports. Since it seems to be so highly regarded by coaches and management (teams), we must develop a multi-pronged approach to develop speed. Many classical approaches in team sport have attempted to address speed improvements in the weight room, specifically through strength improvements. While strength can assist with relatively underdeveloped athletes and more force-end-of-the-spectrum athletes, this approach will only get you so far. Beyond initial strength improvements for the underdeveloped athlete, searching for speed improvements through strength gains may be futile.

The use of more potent methods in the weight room and during training is necessary for the continued development of acceleration and speed. To do this, it vital to understand what makes people fast, physiologically and technically.

The use of more potent methods in the weight room and during training is necessary for the continued development of acceleration and speed, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

Elite sprinters don’t sprint faster than team sport athletes by chance. Of course, things like genetics and specificity of training come into play. No one is really arguing that. It’s tough to max out one single physical quality like speed when many skills and physical qualities are at play in team sport success. Simply recognizing what makes the elite fast can have a trickle-down effect for team sport athletes.

Newton doesn’t care if you compete in soccer, basketball, football, or track. How you run fast is how you run fast.

Now, before everyone gets up in arms about this comment, there are other considerations and game situations that put constraints on the ability to execute speed with model technique. Spatial constraints can change the sprint technique the athlete has to adopt. The proximity of an athlete to an opponent or teammate, the need to change body position based on another’s movement, sprinting while simultaneously trying to put the body in a position to defend, etc.—these all can change the athlete’s sprint technique from model technique to a potentially more successful technique for that given situation. These ideas, though, are beyond the scope of this article.

Acceleration and Max Velocity Characteristics

The qualities that make an athlete a great accelerator are quite different than those that make a great top-speed sprinter. There is some carryover of acceleration qualities to maximal velocity sprinting, and vice versa, as sufficient levels of vertical force production are needed throughout an entire sprint. Additionally, longer, more efficient accelerations typically yield higher maximal velocities, but the physical and technical qualities needed to remain at maximal velocity are at separate ends of the same spectrum.

To start to put the sprinting puzzle together, take a look at the sprint characteristics of the elite sprinting population.

While sub-elite and team sport athletes don’t typically exhibit these elite characteristics, this table does give a glimpse into how the elite sprint fast.

Since we know that speed is the product of stride length and stride frequency, our initial assumption may be to dissect those two characteristics and aim to train those fairly directly.

On the surface, this equation leads us to believe that increasing stride length, stride frequency, or both simultaneously would be the surefire way to increase speed. From a purely mathematical standpoint this would be true. What we sometimes fail to recognize is that when we speak about increasing stride length or frequency, there is an underlying reason these elites have the stride parameters that allow them to sprint as fast as they do.

If we view stride length and frequency as the main drivers of speed and try to directly increase either one of them in an attempt to sprint faster, we could actually be turning an average sprinter into a bad sprinter.

Increasing stride length without a thought of its effect on the rest of technique will result in inefficient ground contact in front of the center of mass, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

Increasing stride length without a thought of its effect on the rest of technique will result in inefficient ground contact in front of the center of mass. Planting well in front of the center of mass will very likely decrease performances in speed, as well as put the athlete at a greater risk of injury (more on this later). This is also true when coaches and athletes increase stride frequency without consideration to other technical sprint characteristics. Think of the cartoon roadrunner spinning his (her?) wheels—super high frequency but going nowhere, and as a result, stride length deteriorates as a result of suboptimal force application.

There is an interplay between the two, but typically, when an athlete tries to increase one without regard to the other, the potential gain from doing so is negated by the drop-off of the opposing value. Oftentimes, the decrease in the opposing value is greater than any potential increase created. This means that when we attempt to increase one parameter, the athlete will often become slower.

So, where does this leave us?

When we look at other characteristics like ground contact times and force production, we also see elites exhibit seemingly impossible values. This leads us to the cause of speed and, in fact, successive improvements in stride length and stride frequency parameters. Rather than viewing stride length and frequency as two separate entities, we must look at how to improve one or both of these qualities without the other deteriorating significantly.

The most effective way to do this is to apply a large amount of force in the appropriate time constraints and in the appropriate directions.

With this in mind, increasing speed comes down to two main factors:

1. Increasing technical proficiency in sprinting.
2. Increasing physical qualities related to acceleration and maximal velocity sprinting.

Governing Principles and Sprinting Commonalities

There are commonalities in technique among the best at anything. It’s no coincidence that the best athletes exhibit similar technical execution in sprinting. Because technique is not the only thing to come into play, and genetics is another major factor in success, someone with suboptimal technique and superior genetics can still be faster than a technical wizard with suboptimal genetics. While you generally need a combination of genetics and great technique at the highest level, there are athletes with some major quirks who are anomalies.

It is important that we don’t look at the anomalies as an example, but rather, a range of competitors. The anomalies are always the ones who get mentioned when it comes to debating how important technique really is or what it should really look like. Many times, the technical quirk does not make them great (although it may); it is that their genetics and other physical qualities are great enough to overshadow the quirk.

Great sprinters all exhibit the same basic technique and then develop individual styles around their anatomical and physical constraints. This should be no different from team sport athletes.

Great sprinters all exhibit the same basic technique and then develop individual styles around their anatomical and physical constraints. This should be no different from team sport athletes. Share on X

While the following are general hallmarks of good sprinting, it does matter what is happening in between them. Plus, if the athlete does not have requisite physical qualities, there may be deviations within these examples.

Governing Technical Principles of Acceleration:

General Leg Action: Piston-like. On first steps, at ground contact the opposite knee will punch forward with minimal cyclical action. The free leg thigh will block perpendicular or near perpendicular to the body, and the shin should be parallel or near parallel to the body. With each subsequent step the foot should “cycle” higher relative to the previous step.

General Arm Swing: Powerful through large ranges of motion. Front arm angle decreases and hand finishes near the eyeline as rear arm angle increases to near full extension and finishes above the body.

Posture: Once the initial push is complete, you should see a near straight line from the shoulder to ankle. Minimal to no folding at the hip. Forcing or cueing the athlete to “lean” or “stay low” may directly impact other technical elements such as placement of foot on touchdown.

Projection: Projection ties into posture a bit, but they are different from one another. You should give the athlete guidance as to how projection should feel and look but chasing specific projection angles shouldn’t be the goal. Forcing the athlete to push out at a specific angle that is beyond their current strength abilities can create stumbling out of acceleration and/or inefficient ground contacts in front of COM. As specific strength increases, the ability to project horizontally should as well. As long as you see steps that gradually progress from the athlete pushing to upright, you’re in the right ballpark.

Ground Contact: Underneath/behind center of mass. This is paramount to appropriate force application. Touching down in front of the COM may elicit higher ground contact times and improper force application in relation to the rest of the body.

Full Support: Support leg continues to push away to near extension while free leg punches to the front side of the body as fast as possible. Intentionally pushing the stance leg to maximal extension may yield worse sprint results due to greater ground contact times. I will cover this potential error in more detail below.

Toe-Off: See the posture and projection sections above.

Governing Technical Principles of Maximum Velocity

Posture: Upright and tall.

General Leg Action: Leg action should move to more cyclical with minimal backside mechanics.

General Arm Swing: Rhythmic and relaxed but pumping hard. The arms should open and close with a smaller angle at the elbow exhibited in the front-side arm and a larger angle at the elbow to the back-side arm. The arms should not stay locked at 90 degrees.

Initial Ground Contact: Foot contacts ground slightly in front of COM. While it’s best to teach athletes to contact under the hip, this actually doesn’t happen in efficient sprinting, as they would fall over forward if it did. The foot, though, should not contact excessively in front of the COM as it would cause excessive braking forces. The free leg thigh will be in line with the stance leg thigh. If the knee is behind the stance leg thigh, this may be excessive backside mechanics.

Full Support: Leg is directly under the hip with as minimal amortization at the knee as possible (this aspect ties into the physical attributes of the athlete). The free leg’s knee should be slightly in front of the support leg’s thigh with the foot continuing to “step over the opposite knee.” If the athlete exhibits appropriate technique, this will look like a “number 4” from a side view.

Toe-Off: On toe-off, the athlete should exhibit near full extension during push-off. Full extension at toe-off is not necessary though. This will increase ground contact time. Achieving full extension in a contrived manner in an attempt to increase vertical or horizontal force production is a fool’s errand, as the peak force application is already completed, and any excess time spent on the ground will deteriorate speed.

Mid-Flight: Maintenance of a generally neutral pelvis is of great importance (not just in flight, but throughout the entire sprint as well). In flight, the shoulder joint to the knee joint should be in a relatively straight line with no major curvature in the spine. The most common backside mechanic problem in team sport is butt kicking.

If you were to draw a vertical line from the shoulder through the hip, the knee would be significantly behind if butt kicking were to occur. Butt kicking puts a huge stretch on the rectus femoris and may cause the pelvis to rotate anteriorly. Without high levels of flexibility in the quad and hip, this will typically put the low back into lordosis, putting the hamstring on greater stretch during the late swing phase and ground contact. This also typically reduces the likelihood of subsequent knee lift, which can limit force application upon ground contact.

Moving Toward a Technical Model

To make any concerted effort at changing sprint technique, we have to first understand what we’re looking at and what deviations we’re looking for. Following a model and developing a coaching eye allow us to do this. The general principles outlined above are the major technical commonalities in successful sprinting. I do believe we need to move team sport athletes closer to that model, but there may be a point when moving closer and closer to a technical model or searching to change finer and finer detail, especially in team sport, can become detrimental.

There may be a point when moving closer and closer to a technical model or searching to change finer and finer detail, especially in team sport, can become detrimental, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

Team sport competition offers many other ways for the athlete and team to be successful than just the physical. Technical and tactical elements will often win and lose games more often than physical elements. Individuals in the NBA may be able to jump out of the gym, but if the team’s jumper is off for the night, they may lose the game. In soccer, if the tactical element is not addressed through training and video, the team may not be prepared well enough to be successful against an opponent. But when all you have are technical skills to rely on, that gives you less chance to be successful than if you also had some physical abilities to fall back on.

Stealing time from sport technical training in the hope of changing a few degrees of arm swing or achieving another inch of knee lift in upright sprinting because “that’s what puts us closer to the model” is probably not worth it. We really need to think about how all the elements of being a successful athlete interact, not just the physical.

Once the foundational concepts are in place and learned, the athlete can and will gravitate to a more individualized style based on anthropometry and personal restrictions and limitations.

As a side note, just because an athlete has sprinted with poor technique their entire career does not mean that we can use the cop-out that this is their “individual style.” This poor technique came about because they have never been taught how to sprint efficiently. Much of their youth was probably spent developing technical sport skill with little development on the technical performance side. 

Injury Considerations

Hamstring injuries in sport are not going away, and there is some evidence to say these modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors play a role:

• Previous injury
• Knee flexor strength
• Muscular properties (fascicle length)
• Age
• Exposure to relatively high sprint speeds
• Technical execution of sprinting*

There are certainly more considerations than these, and injuries never come down to just one thing. We must balance all of these and more to mitigate hamstring or any other soft tissue injury risk. Additionally, some of these risk factors bleed into one another, meaning that increased knee flexor strength as well as exposure to sprint speeds can enhance fascicle length.

We’ll tackle the two that deal specifically with speed:

• Technical execution
• Exposure to maximal velocity

Modifying Sprint Technique

Sprint technique should be addressed as a way to reduce risk of injury. Even if research does not fully support this idea yet, I believe it will. Many strength and conditioning coaches agree that performing weight room exercises under great load with suboptimal technique has a higher injury risk when compared to that same exercise and load completed with closer to optimal technique for that individual. Sprinting is no different than this idea—it’s a high-force, high-velocity exercise that demands technical execution.

Sprint technique should be addressed as a way to reduce risk of injury. Even if research does not fully support this idea yet, I believe it will, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

Most sprint coaches would agree there would be some increased risk of injury if their 11 m/s athlete started to sprint with major backside mechanics or plant significantly in front of the center of mass, as some team sport athletes do. Just as important to injury risk is performance—that 11 m/s athlete would not be an 11 m/s athlete anymore if these things were to occur. If anything, the bigger picture reason may be decreased performance and sprint speed.

If the best sprint coaches and researchers believe there is a relatively clear definition of optimal and suboptimal technique, why are some technical issues not always viewed as suboptimal in other sports?

Once we understand the governing principles, we can start to take inventory of what we potentially want to change in certain athletes. Don’t expect to change every technical flaw either. Trying to perform a complete overhaul of technique to mimic these governing principles in one fell swoop may cause issues. We’re better off fixing the big rocks first. Big errors, when fixed, can sometimes clean up the little errors.

Generally, work from big flaw to small flaw, biggest performance gainer to smallest performance gainer, and/or biggest injury risk to smallest injury risk. It is crucial to understand the “big rock” components of the model and recognize how far away technically the athlete is currently. I think there are a few key considerations when looking to change sprinting technique for a team sport athlete:

1. Does their current technique put them at a higher risk for injury? This points to the idea of how far away they are from the technical model. Assuming there is a connection between technical execution and injury risk, this becomes one of the most important considerations.
2. If you were successful at changing a specific aspect of sprint technique, are you confident this change will improve performance or reduce injury risk? If not, it may not be worth the time investment.
3. What is that athlete’s injury history? If the athlete’s injury history is clean, you may be a bit more aggressive in your approach than what you may do with an athlete who has had a rash of hamstring strains or soft tissue injuries.
4. If the athlete does have a clean injury history, where are they in your bandwidth of technical acceptability? This brings us back to consideration #1.

Spending significant time to modify a few degrees of arm swing or trying to get an athlete’s knee up another inch might not be worth it. Greater performance gains in team sport might be seen by spending that time working on technical and tactical elements of sport.

Another important consideration is the athlete’s age. Do we spend as much time on a 30+ year-old athlete as we do a 20-year-old athlete? It’s not that we can’t improve older athletes, but they’ve had significantly more time engraining their current sprint technique than a 20-year-old. This may make the 30-year-old a bigger project, and it can potentially be more time-consuming to pull them out their bad habits. This scenario also brings us back to the considerations above.

Dose and Frequency

Many coaches now tout maximal velocity sprinting as a protective mechanism for the hamstring. I am no different. I do believe that exposure to intense sprinting is quite important. If an athlete is not prepared to perform intense work or the tissue is not capable of effectively handling high levels of tension, there is an increased risk of injury. Intense preparation is imperative for intense competition.

Intense preparation is imperative for intense competition, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

There are research studies that show there is a “sweet spot” of speed exposure to reduce injuries. One, in particular, shows the U-shaped curve, and the lowest incidence of injury is between 5 and 11 maximal velocity speed reps per week. While great conceptually, this does not account for the frequency at which it is dosed within the week (and based on anecdotal evidence, I think the number of reps may be overzealous).

We must think about the frequency at which we expose athletes to this high-intensity work. Is the athlete being exposed to this volume of sprinting 2-3 days in a row, twice a week with a day or two between, once every seven days? Completing five near-maximal velocity sprints in one training session or game is not the same as completing one near-maximal sprint five days in a row. I’m not suggesting anyone is actually doing the latter, but this is an illustration to show that it is not only the count of sprints at the end of the week that matters, but the frequency of exposure as well as the quality of movement matter more.

I’ve tracked velocities >90% in training and matches for a few years now, and I’m not convinced it needs to be as frequent or in as relatively a high volume as the research would indicate. If an athlete missed a seven-day rolling window of sprinting at high velocity, I never forced them to make it up immediately. My step-in point was usually between 14 and 21 days, as I thought this would be the point that tissue preparedness would start to decrease. I have no hard evidence on that 14- to 21-day window, but I know tissue preparedness does not wane from Friday to Monday. Forcing an athlete to “make up” maximal velocity work without a thought on where it should be placed can actually cause problems in itself.

Forcing an athlete to “make up” maximal velocity work without a thought on where it should be placed can actually cause problems in itself, says @john_r_grace. Share on X

If you neglect where you place maximal velocity sprinting and just check the box to check the box, you could easily blow an athlete up. Maybe not on that particular day, but a few days down the road is possible. If this does happen, the temptation is then usually to blame it on lack of exposure and that the athlete needed more. In reality, it could have had nothing to do with lack of exposure and actually been the placement of the stimulus that did it—sprinting at an inappropriate time can be just as harmful as not sprinting.

Ability

You shouldn’t treat your speed-power studs like your donkeys. Sprinting and plyometric activities are largely self-intensifying. In other words, as the athlete jumps farther and higher, and as sprinting speeds become faster, the tension generated within the muscles and tendons is greater, in turn creating a greater stress response. A 10 m/s team sport athlete may not be able to handle the speed volume of work that an 8.5 m/s athlete can.

A common thought is that the speed-power stud needs to do more to raise the ceiling or can handle more because they have a more robust set of physical qualities, but in fact it is quite the opposite. The speed-power stud typically shouldn’t do more because of the additional stress incurred from working at higher intensities. For this reason, there is little need to progress volumes over the course of the year, as long as the exercises chosen allow the athlete to express high levels of intensity, and the athlete’s physical qualities are improving.

Anecdotally, slower, less powerful athletes have fewer muscular injuries simply because they don’t have the engine to produce the intensities needed to actually injure themselves.

Acceleration and Speed Development Is Not Just Acceleration and Speed Development

Strength and conditioning coaches often don’t view sprint training as “strength” work.

Why?

Take a couple steps back and think about what strength is. Rather than thinking of strength as how much you lift, think of strength as a neural quality that requires the muscles and tendons to produce appropriate levels of tension to complete a task. If we adopt this definition of strength, exposing an athlete to sprinting is one of the, if not the, highest tensions a muscle and tendon complex will ever be exposed to.

Rather than thinking of strength as how much you lift, think of strength as a neural quality that requires the muscles and tendons to produce appropriate levels of tension to complete a task. Share on X

Is acceleration and speed training “strength” work? Yes. Sprinting has the ability to improve tissue capacity due to the high levels of tension just like traditional strength work does. I don’t necessarily think they are an equal trade-off and wouldn’t ditch the traditional strength work in the weight room, but this does put sprinting as a means of strength/neural training in a new or different light, especially when a weight room is not available. We don’t have to revert to bodyweight lunges and squats that are largely fluff and fillers to make it look like we’re doing something. Sprinting, jumping, and throwing are a viable maintenance strategy during the competition season.

Traditional strength training largely carries over to speed because of the neural adaptations, not necessarily because the muscle was able to produce more tension or force. Maximal intensity sprinting produces the highest tension in the shortest amount of time out of any exercise that you can do. It’s not a one-sided connection in that strength improves speed. It’s reciprocal, as there is a connection between these two qualities. Strength training can enhance sprinting from a neural stimulation standpoint, whereas sprinting can enhance strength and power from a neural and tension standpoint.

Outside of actual transfer of speed to the field and court, this is the reason sprinting as a means of training to maintain and/or develop other physical qualities is useful. Maximal intensity acceleration and speed training is such a potent stimulus. The qualities developed from sprinting can carry over to sports that don’t necessarily need speed to be successful, such as volleyball or tennis.

Complementary Training Components to Acceleration and Speed

Training elements need to be complementary to the end goal. In this case we’re specifically dealing with the abilities to accelerate and sprint faster. It is important to note that these complementary training elements are also applicable to other sporting movements, as the goal is to largely enhance specific aspects such as improving motor unit recruitment, rate coding, and motor unit synchronization. Of course, these suggestions are not exhaustive and are most likely more of a representation of the philosophy I have adopted though the years.

There are certain exercises that lend themselves much better to acceleration than others. Training elements that can be complementary to acceleration development:

• Speed: Heavy and light resisted sprints, hill sprints, accelerations
• Plyometric/Jumps: Horizontal and vertical jumping with relatively longer GCT, basic bounding, static medicine ball throws, skipping variants, etc.
• Resistance Training: moderate to heavy Olympic lifts and pulling variants, squats, deadlifts, lunges

Note: Be careful with heavy sled pushes to assist here. The benefits of any joint angle-specific loading can be washed away with flat-footed contacts and a hunched-over torso. On top of this, a sled push requires the arms to hold the sled handles, which takes away from specificity as well. I’m also skeptical that heavy sled pushes have similar neuromuscular coordination characteristics as something like heavy back squats.

There are also certain exercises that lend themselves much better to maximal velocity. Training elements that can be complementary to speed development:

• Speed: Flys, sprint float sprint type, maximal sprinting
• Plyometric/Jumps: Hurdle hopping, depth jumping, vertical emphasis bounding variants, dynamic/elastic medicine ball throws, assisted jumping, etc.
• Resistance Training: Light to heavy Olympic lifts and pulling variants, quarter/half squats, shorter ROM step-ups, etc.

Note: Assisted sprinting is sometimes a popular method to employ, but this can backfire easily. Assisted sprinting leads one to believe it is working because it looks faster and because of the end result of faster sprint times when performing the exercise. These faster sprint times are largely due to covering more distance during flight. In fact, assisted sprinting may result in longer ground contact times due to the athlete needing to place the foot down farther in front of COM to stay balanced. This the exact opposite of the characteristics needed to sprint fast.

Interconnected Qualities and Techniques

Each one of these topics could certainly be an article in itself, and while I initially wanted to write a few thoughts about sprint technique, it’s hard to mention only one of these topics on its own without the others since they are all quite connected.

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

The sports performance industry is currently in uncharted territory, simply from the standpoint of the uncertainty shadowing how and when we will all return to doing what we do best. On top of that uncertainty comes this crucial question: As coaches, how do we ensure it is safe for our athletes to return to physical activity? Any strength and conditioning coach will agree that the concern over soft tissue injuries is at the forefront of our minds during this process.

As we begin bringing back our athletes, many of us have realized that you can tell and show an athlete what to do independently, but their training intensity is not the same as when they are being coached. We can tell them what to do, but without a coach correcting their technique, creating motivation, or pushing them to strive for more, the training effect is not the same. Therefore, despite all the time spent on at-home training programs and trying to hold your athletes accountable, they still may not be prepared when circumstances allow a return to training or competition.

One of the major steps we are taking to ensure that our athletes will be prepared when their season begins is extending our sprint technique warm-up. Share on X

At Varsity House Gym, one of the major steps we are taking to ensure that our athletes will be prepared when their season begins is extending our sprint technique warm-up. Simply put, this is a way for us to stress the mechanics of sprinting without stressing their joints and tendons with the higher forces and velocities of actually sprinting. There are three reasons I believe extending your sprint prep warm-up is the key to helping prepare your athletes for return to their sport:

1. The low-impact nature of warm-up drills will not overtax their tendons and joints, and they will be more prepared for the higher intensities of sprinting.
2. By extending our warm-up process, we are building in some extra work capacity through the increase in tonnage (by yards) of the amount of work the athlete performs. For example, we will have them do all their sprint prep work through 20 yards down and back. After six drills, we will have already built up to 240 yards of work without taxing the athlete as much.
3. Making athletes perform more reps of their sprint technique will give them more opportunities to figure out how to solve the complex motor issues of live sprinting.

What Does an Extended Sprint Warm-Up Look Like?

When we perform our sprint prep series, there are, generally speaking, approximately 4-6 drills that we do, depending on the time of year, the time within the training block, and the experience of the athletes we work with. Along with that, we work from slow to fast and simple to complex in the drills that we choose to do for that day. This allows the athlete to build on one drill into the next, again giving us more reference points to pull from for technical cues.

As you can see, all of the drills follow the progression of slow to fast and simple to complex—simply adding a level of intent or speed to a drill is a progression in itself. Therefore, each time you add speed to a drill (i.e., A-Walk to A-March), you require the athlete to solve the same movement problem in a more intense environment. Even a small change in pace can expose imbalances or technical inconsistencies with an inexperienced athlete.

Next, when it comes to the warm-up process, we do our volume considerations in three- or four-week waves, again giving our athletes optimal opportunities to adapt to the stimulus. Yet the way we work, it actually happens in reverse: We have a longer warm-up during the first 1-2 weeks, as it helps our athletes adapt to the training stimulus a bit better. We may perform our sprint prep drills for 20+ yards or meters for two rounds during the initial weeks.

As athletes become more efficient with the warm-up process, we can then decrease the volume and increase the intensity of the warm-ups by introducing some more complex warm-up options. When we lessen the volume, we can start by lowering the number of sets first and then lowering the distance traveled, as we want to still allow them actual time to adapt to the more complex stimuli.

Why It Works

I previously mentioned the three reasons that extending the sprint warm-up helps to prepare athletes for return to their sport. Here, I explain the thinking behind those reasons as well as how to apply it with your own athletes.

1. Has a Low Impact on Joints and Tissues

The best ability is availability. Coaches across all levels cannot express this mantra enough to their athletes. This will be our #1 job as strength coaches—ensuring our athletes are available when it is time to hit the field. Athletes will not be ready to start moving at fast velocities on day 1, week 1…maybe not even month 1. Therefore, we need to make sure we initially do things that are low impact and joint- and tissue-friendly to ensure continued availability to train and play.

As a return-to-play policy, extending the warm-ups will help increase the resilience of the athletes’ tissues, helping them become more accustomed to those forces over time. Share on X

The low-impact nature of warm-up drills like marching, skipping, and dribbling make them great places to start. Performing these drills allows us to reintroduce proper sprinting mechanics without the added velocities and forces of live sprinting. As a return-to-play policy, extending the warm-ups will help increase the resilience of the athletes’ tissues, helping them become more accustomed to those forces over time. The resilience and stiffness of their tendons will correlate highly to their readiness to jump, throw, and sprint, as it will directly affect the stretch-shortening cycle of the muscle¹.

Given the amount of time many of our athletes have been on the couch, their tendons will not have the prerequisite tissue stiffness to handle the necessary intensities. Using low-impact warm-ups to help re-establish tendon stiffness and resilience will be vital to helping them return to play. Providing more stiffness in the tendons will prevent overloading our athletes to perform activities that their bodies are not prepared to perform.

2. Increases Work Capacity

A major obstacle to returning to play will be the athletes’ level of conditioning (or lack thereof). Even when experienced athletes work out on their own, there can be a different training stimulus then training in the gym environment. For example, one of our elite-level athletes in the NBA was still training on his own throughout the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the minute he came back to training, he was highly detrained, and it took him about two weeks to get back to where he was before the quarantine started. Considering that reality, if an elite-level athlete can take two weeks to get back to regular training, what do we think high school athletes will be like?

Using the warm-up to gain work capacity is an easy layup for creating additional opportunities without the direct stress of a conditioning protocol. Even something as simple as a few 50-yard shuttles will be a challenge for athletes who have been slacking during the time off.

Using the warm-up to gain work capacity is an easy layup for creating additional opportunities without the direct stress of a conditioning protocol. Share on X

Extending the pre-sprint warm-up process creates an opportunity to increase that work capacity in a low-impact environment. Performing the drills with optimal technique over distances of 20 or 30 yards/meters will tax both the muscular and cardiovascular systems of athletes who may have been less active than their norm. You can also opt to perform drills stationary, using time instead of distance, which can give you greater control over the work-to-rest ratios and more ability to dial in the conditioning aspect. Thankfully, the general low intensity of warm-up drills can allow you to have athletes perform them for extended periods without worrying about overworking the athlete.

Using these tools to sneak in extra “conditioning”—without the high impact or intensity of real conditioning—will be paramount for an efficient return to play. We can push the time of work without the fear of detrimental soft tissue injuries, as long as we maintain low intensities over an extended distance or time. Building back a base of basic work capacity will help us lay the groundwork for increased work down the line—and now, more than ever, this needs to be at the forefront of our consideration.

3. Improves Technical Proficiency

When it comes to sprinting, getting your athletes to understand the proper postures and positioning is an important step. Yet, we aren’t always able to spend the amount of time we probably should on giving the athlete’s brain time to figure out the proper positions.

Many of us are familiar with the 10,000-hour rule, which states that it may take 10,000 hours to become an expert at something. Especially when it comes to something as complex as sprinting, this rule is something that we can apply—so why not try and get more practice in? Literally reaching 10,000 hours will probably rarely happen, but mastering an essential skill for sport performance with intent and deliberate practice is something that we can work toward.

When working with younger athletes in particular, it may take them longer to grasp the complex concepts of sprinting, so we should give them more opportunities to figure out those issues. By extending the sprint warm-up process, we give them those opportunities at focused practice to keep getting closer to mastery of the skill of sprinting. As they continue to build and grow their understanding of the desired postures, patterns, and shapes they are trying to accomplish with their bodies, their understanding of technical cues will grow in concert.

By extending the sprint warm-up process, we give younger athletes opportunities at focused practice to keep getting closer to mastery of the skill of sprinting. Share on X

As coaches, we can shout whatever cue we want, but if our athletes do not understand what the cues mean, we are wasting our voice and their time. If we can grow their base of movement knowledge, we can provide more reference points as to what patterns or shapes they are trying to accomplish. A novice athlete may not understand the concept of good frontside lift and why it is important, but if we can give them a reference point of an A-Skip or A-Run, they can connect those dots more easily.

By extending the warm-ups and benefitting from the combined effects of improved work capacity and technical proficiency, our athletes can also become more accustomed to maintaining those postures for longer periods. This may be something more pertinent to track coaches, where middle distance runners may be forced to maintain technical proficiency under extreme levels of fatigue. But even team sport athletes can use this concept—a soccer athlete may have to make a big push in the final minutes of the game under fatigue. Even though the technique of the sprint mechanics may not be the same, the idea of being able to pull from those capabilities while fatigued is still important.

Warming Up with a Purpose

The simple act of extending the sprint warm-up process and using these drills as a chance to get some more light and extensive plyometrics before a training session will be a saving factor for many of our athletes returning to play. Their joints and tendons will be very lax and not ready for the intensities of all-out extended sprints, and we need to be prepared to give them the proper time to get back into shape. But, let us not forget the reason we even do sprint prep to begin with—the complex movement patterns of sprinting need to be constantly practiced and refined, even for the best athletes in the world. By using an extended warm-up of upward of 20 meters, we give our relatively novice athletes more chances to understand these complex patterns.

This time in history may be unprecedented, but it does not mean that we do not have the tools to deal with it. Share on X

Above all, we as coaches need to ensure that we do no harm to our athletes: Their health is our job to maintain and improve. This time in history may be unprecedented, but it does not mean that we do not have the tools to deal with it. By simply moving around some volume in different areas, we can give our athletes the best chance to be prepared for their respective sports as we start the slow return to normal activities. And using the sprint prep warm-up in an extensive fashion and as a low-level plyometric to prep the body for more intense activities is a major key to getting them prepared.

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

Kubo K, Kawakami Y, and Fukunaga T. “Influence of elastic properties of tendon structures on jump performance in humans.” Journal of Applied Physiology. (1985). 1999;87(6):2090‐2096. DOI:10.1152/jappl.1999.87.6.2090

Failure is a facilitator of growth. I full-heartedly believe that we learn so much more from our mistakes than from our successes. There is something about failure that stimulates our minds and makes us find a better way to accomplish the task at which we were unsuccessful.

Indeed, we have likely all made mistakes in our careers that we are extremely grateful for, as our failures typically helped shape us into the coaches we are today.

We have likely all made mistakes in our careers that we are extremely grateful for, as our failures typically helped shape us into the coaches we are today, says @bigk28. Share on X

However, although failure may be an integral part of everyone’s career, I have come across a few simple mistakes in my own career that I want to save you the burden of going through personally. In this article, I share five mistakes to avoid in order to help solidify your position as a sports performance coach and a necessity in your athletic department.

1. Giving in to the Athlete(s)

I see this way too often: coaches judging the effectiveness of their program based on the athletes liking/disliking what they are doing. At the end of the day, you are the professional, and you know what is best for the team and the individual players. If you go by what the athletes enjoy, you will spend the entire weight room session doing bench presses, tricep pushdowns, barbell curls, static stretches, and core work. Breed a culture where players value performance and want to do well with the workout you prescribe. Create value for your workouts by linking them to tests that challenge similar characteristics to the ones needed by athletes in the sport they play.

Create value for your workouts by linking them to tests that challenge similar characteristics to the ones needed by athletes in the sport they play, says @bigk28. Share on X

These are some of the tests that I connect to our activities in the weight room:

Speed —> Timed 10/20/40s, flying 10s

Jumping —> SRJT, max vert

Lift —> Barbell power output

We perform these tests weekly and rank each player so they can see where they stand amongst the team. It breeds competitiveness, and you won’t have players asking to do alternatives that aren’t effective in improving performance. Don’t get me wrong, it is vital that athletes respect the workout and its benefits. Sometimes the simple act of explaining the workout and how it carries over to their sport goes a long way in having athletes put 100% of their effort into the workout, instead of them complaining that there is other stuff they should be doing. If your program does the job of improving sports performance, athletes will buy in.

2. Giving in to the Sports Coach(es)

I say this with a caveat, because I know at some levels, sports performance coaches are linked to their sport coach, and that relationship is the most important part of them retaining their job. However, if you do have the flexibility to be autonomous, you should not follow the demands of the sport coach on what exactly you should do for speed, power, and strength development.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told that players need quicker feet and to do more ladder drills (cue the eye roll). I say “exactly” because you can’t be a dictator blocking out any input the coaches share with you. The sport coach’s input is a valuable piece of developing a sports performance plan. And, at the end of the day, it is their butts on the line if they don’t have success. There are things we may not notice that are very clear to them the more time they spend with the players.

However, sport coaches are experts in one thing—the sport they coach. Just as you are the professional for developing sports performance, they are responsible for developing the tactics and skills of the players during their time in the program. Still, it is important to have a great relationship with your sports coach, as you are both on the same team when it comes to maximizing a player’s potential.

Most of the time when I ask coaches what they need the players to work on, it boils down to a few things—to be: 1) faster; 2) more explosive; 3) stronger; and 4) in better “shape.” This is where you need to do a good job educating the coaches and remove the phrase “sports specificity” from their vocabulary. The most sport-specific activity any athlete will participate in is the sport itself!

I don’t think the sport coach should dictate the sports performance plan, but it’s important to get their feedback on what their “coaching eye” tells them throughout the course of a practice/game. Share on X

Now, I particularly believe that conditioning should occur by building up max velocity, thereby improving their speed reserve, or built up through high-intensity practice. But I all too often hear coaches telling their athletes to go on long runs or do treadmill sprints to get in better “shape.” This is not ideal, and the sport coach should speak to the sports performance coach before making any type of suggestion. (NCAA catastrophic guidelines are a big step forward for athletes, as the sports performance coach should be the one making the prescription in the first place).

Although I don’t think the sport coach should dictate the sports performance plan, I think it is important to get their feedback on what their “coaching eye” tells them throughout the course of a practice or game. Use what the coach sees in games/practice as an additional piece to the puzzle in designing your sports performance plan. My program is structured on developing speed, power, strength, etc. I often ask a coach, “What sport is specific to the qualities of being fast, powerful, and strong and having the ability to repeat that over and over again?” The answer is all of them.

3. Devalue the Position

There is nothing I hate more than hearing coaches openly devalue themselves in their role and how much (or little) they contribute to the success of the team. When coaches do this, they not only diminish their value in their own athletic department, but when they do it often enough, administrators and coaches will start to agree. Then we as a profession will struggle to improve our compensation.

Do I think that sports performance plays a huge role in the success of the team? Yes! Do I think it is the most important thing? No. The most important factor in the success of any team at any level is the ability to recruit talented players who play the sport at a high level. That is the bottom line. However, if you are at a school where you can’t get top-level athletes, the sports performance coach’s role becomes even more critical in the development of the athlete.

We sport performance coaches need to stop humbly devaluing our role and our contribution to the success of the team, says @bigk28. Share on X

Guess what the next most important part of the equation is? Keeping those players on the court/field/ice, etc. This is where the sports performance coach has huge value for protecting the players so that they are able to compete at a high level all year long. I think that good sports performance coaches will continue to improve (or at least maintain) their athlete’s athletic qualities all year long, while also keeping them healthy enough to compete at that high level. We are not injury preventers and should never make the claim. But we do play a huge role in reducing the risk of injury and helping players compete throughout the entire year.

If you are at a school where you are the only person on your sports medicine staff, your value becomes even greater. Some would say that at the high school level, ATCs are a necessity, but sometimes, unfortunately, there isn’t enough money in the budget to hire both positions (at least from what I’ve seen locally). There is no need to worry here; as long as you have your CPR/AED certification, you can provide frontline standard care in the case of an emergency until EMS arrives on the scene. A well-structured sports performance plan acts as an ATC in itself, reducing the incidence of injury and keeping your athletes competing at a high level.

I love the quote “the best ability is availability,” and we as sports performance coaches play a huge role in that. I love when I read articles where the head coach openly praises their sports performance coach and say how they are the most important coach on their staff. We need to live up to the expectations and make our coaches feel that way instead of humbly devaluing our position.

4. Not Using Technology as a Resource

I write about this with a grin because I have made this mistake my entire career. If you want to be able to run an effective sports performance program and save yourself the man hours of inputting and evaluating, find a technology you can trust. Luckily, there are so many good systems out there nowadays, you can have your choice of the system that fits in with exactly what you are looking for.

I personally do a ton of testing with regard to speed, power, and strength and need a system that saves me the hassle of sitting at a computer and manually inputting numbers into Excel. For example, with regard to speed, we time some type of sprint 2-3 times a week with each of my 21 teams. With roughly 400 athletes, that comes out to 800-1200 sprint times a week.

Do yourself a favor—get yourself a tracking system, as it will act as another assistant coach on your staff, says @bigk28. Share on X

Even if I did have the time and energy to input all those test scores, I would definitely not be able to take the time to go through each individual athlete and notice any trends. If I can’t effectively judge whether or not my program is working, what is the sense in getting all these testing measures? Having a system where all of the technology is linked and recorded for me is a huge timesaver and one all coaches must explore. I personally would go with CoachMePlus, as it pairs with a plethora of technology already on the market. Do yourself a favor—get yourself a tracking system, as it will act as another assistant coach on your staff.

5. Saying “It Isn’t About the Money.”

I am lucky to be part of a profession with the most committed and dedicated professionals I have ever come across in any field. If you are in the sports performance field for a prolonged period of time, it is safe to say that you absolutely love what you do, otherwise you would never last. I am 10 years in the profession, and I am always giddy when I get to train my athletes and see progression and growth throughout their careers.

However, I don’t know if there a profession more guilty of saying the phrase “it isn’t about the money” than the sports performance one. I get it—we are so in love with what we do as a career that we almost make it seem that we would do it for any salary they offer us. And therein lies the problem. When we say things that show that we don’t care about monetary compensation, we lower our value as professionals. If you do a job that isn’t about the money, why shouldn’t your bosses pay you the least amount they can? I mean, do you ever hear doctors use this phrase?

Maybe in a humanitarian vision we all work for free, but in the real world that is not sustainable if you wish to support yourself and your family. We should advocate for everyone in the profession to be paid more because of the value we bring and stop acting like what we do is a charity. It is okay to push for higher pay and higher compensation; as a profession we deserve it.

When we say things that show that we don’t care about monetary compensation, we lower our value as professionals, says @bigk28. Share on X

As we grow older in life and have to take care of families and mortgages, saying our job isn’t about the money will put us in very difficult situations. That phrase also gives schools the freedom to make starting salaries extremely low and attract someone who is just dying to get in the field and willing to accept any dollar amount to do it. That is unacceptable, and we need to eliminate this language from our vernacular. We are high-functioning professionals who bring a ton of value and deserve to be compensated as such.

Avoid the Easy Mistakes

Mistakes are a part of the sports performance profession, but there are some easy mistakes we can avoid. We are leaders in our departments and one of the biggest assets for our teams, and we need to act as such. Communication with players and coaches is so vital for the buy-in to your program and for facilitating a program that is best-suited for each one of your teams. Without communication you will never be able to build trust and develop your athletes the way you want to.

All of the assessments, from both the sport coach and the performance coach, are all pieces of the bigger puzzle and must be taken into consideration when designing a sports performance plan. As you look to expand and grow your department, rely on technology as another “assistant” and help with everyday tasks that would be tedious for you otherwise. Remember, we are high-level professionals and deserve to be compensated as such. Don’t sell the profession short—we are one of the most passionate professional groups out there.

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

This article is part of a series in which I outline the athlete level classification program, also known as “blocking,” that we use at York Comprehensive High School (YCHS). It’s imperative for sports performance coaches to have a well-planned, evidence-based program to progress young athletes through as they grow. Just as a teacher in an academic class would build on concepts and practices, so must we.

In this article, I expand on how we prepare our rising freshmen as they move through our “Block 1 New” classification and eventually graduate to “Block 2 Novice.” I outline the programming and technique protocols we use with our Block 2s in depth. Finally, I discuss how our athletes prepare for graduation from Block 2 and into our “Block 3 Advanced” category.

I hope this article will be of help to you and your athletes. We work in a field where taking other coaches’ ideas and adjusting them to your own program needs is a very powerful skill to possess. If this or anything else I have will be helpful to you, I urge you to copy, adjust, and make use of it in any way possible.

Review of Transitioning Block 1 Freshmen to Block 2 Sophomores

In my previous article on introducing new athletes to our program, I discussed the “slow cooking” process of transitioning our incoming freshmen from our Block 0 program to our freshman Block 1 level and touched on the Block 1 “graduation” standards. In general, the process stays consistent as we progress up the ladder of our program’s layered programming model. We use a combination of movement mastery, body frame, body weight, and strength ratios in our three strength movements to recommend promotion. Our Block 1s must achieve a combined 80% of the following “goals” to be eligible for promotion to Block 2.

Figure 2 shows an example of this using the chart of a large-framed athlete with a body weight of 200.

This athlete is well above the 80% threshold. If he also masters his movement, he will be promoted to Block 2. These numbers will be projected 1 rep max totals. In general (there have been individual exceptions), we do not 1 rep max test our athletes until the end of Block 2 (sophomore) in preparation for transition to Block 3. We project these off a “plus” set that we do at approximately 86% of their previously predicted 1RM, which we do for each of the three strength movements once in each four-week cycle (to be discussed later in the article).

Once our athletes reach these standards, we graduate them to Block 2 Novice and adjust the programming to reflect the progression. At this point, we also introduce our athletes to our devices. Part of earning promotion to Novice is being given the privilege of going from a paper sheet with a workout on it to the use of CoachMePlus on a tablet. This is a step toward the gradual move from coach control to a student-athlete controlled learning model.

Review of Block 1 Programming

In the previous article, I discussed how we use a modified version of progression for our three main strength movements that is very similar to Jim Wendler’s 5/3/1, or a traditional BFS program with some slight modifications for our Block 1 athletes. As with all parts of our program, athletes must earn this in a progressive manner. Initially (starting in the summer of freshman year), we spend time reviewing and reteaching all movements from Block 0. We slowly progress throughout the summer, adding variation until we feel the group is ready for the next step.

Step 2 of our progressive program introduces our athletes to the general outline of how they will do things on a daily basis during their time with us. We put the workout in the form of our modified tier system, using the movements that they will learn and use throughout their time in Block 2. We print these as sheets from our CoachMePlus calendar.

During this period, the load is set and does not change until they have sufficient mastery of each movement and we are ready to add weight to the movements. Not all of our athletes will graduate at the same time. We do our best to promote only when each athlete is physically prepared to do so. The set load is kept very light. This can sometimes frustrate athletes who may be capable of lifting more weight than programmed. You must explain to the group why you program the way you do and the advantage they will have when you finally do add to the load.

During Block 2, our goal is mastery of movement, and the weight used doesn’t really matter to us at this point except as a teaching tool, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

This is also an excellent opportunity for our athletes to master technique and practice bar speed. We always have a few athletes who, even with the very light load, struggle with it being too much. We instruct those athletes to stop at whatever weight they can do without a struggle and use the same weight for the rest of the programmed sets. Our goal is mastery of movement, and the weight used doesn’t really matter to us at this point except as a teaching tool.

Here is an example of a printout given to the Block 1 athletes during the last few weeks of summer.

The final step of Block 1 is to progress to using percentage of projected max, as well as volume periodization, which they will use through the end of Block 2. This programming starts out initially with a very modest projected max for our bench press, hex bar deadlift, and front squat movements. It also features progressing variations of vertical and horizontal push and pull movements, Olympic variations, and posterior chain variations, as well as squat variations other than the front squat. The vast majority of those reps will be done initially in the 50-59% relative intensity range to focus on movement mastery and bar speed.

We progress from that point with both main movement projected max and relative intensity of all other movements and variations. By the end of Block 1, our athletes will have progressed to the point where we have a pretty good idea of a predicted 1RM for our three main movements based on the plus sets they do once in each cycle. Those plus sets in Block 1 set the projected 1RM, along with technique proficiency, and we use them to determine when an athlete is eligible for promotion to Block 2. By the late winter and early spring, we usually have a handful of freshmen ready for Block 2.

Programming for Block 2 Athletes: Basic Design Layout

Our program for all layers is a three-day-a-week split. We use a modified tier system with the traditional total, upper, and lower daily split that rotates once per week through speed/dynamic Tier 1, total strength Tier 2, and volume acclimation Tier 3. Tier 1 includes Olympic movements and variations along with other lower-intensity/higher-velocity movements. Tier 2 features one of our three base strength movements or a variation (trap bar deadlift, squat, and bench press), an antagonist auxiliary movement, and a prehab/mobility movement.

Tier 3 is where one area of our “modified” version really comes into play. Traditionally, this is a volume/hypertrophy tier. We use this much of the time for that same programming. However, this is also a place where we work in some additional Olympic squat and/or pull variations as dictated by our volume progression plan, which I will discuss later.

Our yearly plan is split into four-week cycles. We use a concurrent periodization plan and train equally for power, strength, and hypertrophy together. What may be different from some programs is that our method of progression uses volume as our priority method of overload. Intensity is a secondary factor and is not necessarily tied into volume—both can be manipulated independently as needed.

Therefore, when I say “heavy” or “light” day or week when describing a microcycle or day within a microcycle, that does not refer to the intensity range of our lifts. In fact, it refers to the total volume count for reps 50% or over in one of our six “counting” movement families (squat, press, pull, clean, snatch, posterior chain). Our heavy days may indeed use lower-intensity ranges and our light days often include heavier intensity.

Why we do this is an article in itself (or a book called “The System,” which is one of the most influential books I’ve ever read). Basically, we do this because we place great value on movement proficiency and bar speed over absolute strength. We must always remember the actual sport we are preparing for is the priority, not the number we can hang on a goal board.

Moving a bar loaded so much that they move it very slowly (and do it often) will make an athlete stronger. However, the strength they gain from that will likely not translate to sport as well as a little more moderate load moving at max velocity. Bar speed is the king of transfer to sport from the weight room. We believe using volume as our primary form of forcing adaptation via overload is the most effective way to produce our desired outcome for our athletes.

We believe using volume as our primary form of forcing adaptation via overload is the most effective way to produce our desired outcome for athletes, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

As in all aspects of our layered block program, we transition from a more consistent set-rep scheme to our volume wave periodization in steps. In Block 2, our athletes use the wave volume program in all movements except our Tier 2 base movement. We continue to use the version of “5/3/1” we began using at the end of Block 1. Block 2 athletes use a wave within the days of the week, but the total reps stay consistent except for the volume deload during the fourth week.

In blocks 3 and 4, we further “wave” the volume within each week of a cycle. This is another way we use volume to ensure the athlete continues to progress and avoids training plateaus as they age in our program. We also do not use “snatch” variations until closer to the end of the block, so those are not reflected in the volume count at this point.

Our four-week mesocycle is divided into three-day weekly microcycles. The total volume for each cycle is based on the goal number (850-875 counting reps per month) we want our elite athletes to reach by the last few cycles before their preseason. We then work back, subtracting +/-10% per cycle (with a regression cycle at the start of each new block) until we reach a number our Block 2 athletes will actually start with (520 in Cycle 1). Within the week, each day is also subdivided as shown in figure 4.

During this time, we keep the intensity ranges low, spending most of our time in the 50-69% range with all base strength movements. We increase the intensity slowly and cap our relative intensity for each individual movement at 2% per four-week cycle.

Figure 5 below shows a week. Remember, we only count reps over 50%, so even if it says “8 reps” we may do 12, but four of them would be below 50% intensity.

Strength movement programming is the final component for our Block 2 athletes. Our Novice athletes use a less complex version of programming for our “Big 3” Tier 2 base movements (TBDL, front squat, and bench press for this layer). As stated above, this is a version of Wendler’s “5/3/1” program that I adapted from a good friend, Jeremy Evans. We really embrace the idea of simple to complex in our slow-cooking process.

I feel that jumping “full go” into our volume periodization program with sophomores may cause some confusion. Therefore, we allow them to use the following program (figure 6) for their main lifts while we acclimate them to the increasing volume. Our athletes should have technique proficiency with these three movements by this point, and we feel comfortable adding intensity to them.

Our goal is to eventually have the vast majority of our Block 3 and 4 athletes’ reps coming in at the “sweet spot” of 70-85% for bar speed/strength, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

While we keep the majority of our reps in the 50-69% range and build from there, this program provides an opportunity for our athletes to experience a higher load with less volume. As in the “5/3/1” program, we set a training max of 90% of predicted 1RM. Therefore, when you see a set at 95%, it is actually a set at around 85%. Our goal is to eventually have the vast majority of our Block 3 and 4 athletes’ reps coming in at the “sweet spot” of 70-85% for bar speed/strength. This is their first step toward that goal.

Our program has four separate volume intensity ranges. Our athletes do one each of the three training days in a week. On Day 1 of the next week, we do the fourth and then start over. This ensures we get one “dose” of each range with each of our base movements. Using the AMRAP set, we can get an approximate adjusted max each cycle for each movement as well.

It’s very important to keep in mind that just because an athlete graduates to Block 2, doesn’t mean any of these programming items are set in stone. The “coach’s eye” is still the best tool to give our athletes what they need. Too many times, coaches get caught up in rushing athletes to heavier loads and more complexity of movements.

There is no need to do that. Just about anything we do for them at this age will result in growth. I see no need to push any of our athletes to missed reps or failure, especially our Block 2s. Make sure you have a progression and regression program and use it. The vast majority of our Block 2s do not rack cleans or do back squats. When they are ready, they will do them.

Just about anything we do for them at this age will result in growth. I see no need to push any of our athletes to missed reps or failure, explains @YorkStrength17. Share on X

From a safety and a sports performance standpoint, a loaded jump or a quick and soundly executed clean pull are superior to a “reverse curl”-looking hang clean. Remember SPORT first, numbers second. A clean doesn’t translate to the field of play if it’s done with poor technique. Neither does a slow, overloaded or “half” range back squat.

Our job isn’t to make athletes the strongest people on the field or court; it’s to help them reach maximum performance. Mastery of movements and being able to do those movements at max velocity BEFORE heavy loads are added will help athletes stay healthier and be more explosive during their sport. Adding load and more movement complexity slowly as they master bar speed can make that explosion very powerful as well.

Here is a typical workout from CoachMePlus for our Block 2 group.

Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

Block 2 Final Notes

The program design above is what our athletes use as we move through Block 2. Generally, we see a small handful of athletes begin to transition to Block 3 during the mid-spring of their sophomore year. Most, especially my football athletes (who have classes year-round), graduate after our May testing.

As I said above, this is also the time when a few athletes also begin the transition from pulls and loaded jumps to hang cleans, and from front squats to back squats. I do not allow an athlete to do hang cleans if they “short pull.” That is the No. 1 mistake my athletes make. The second is foot displacement being way too wide during the catch. Both of these errors take away from the power development of the movement. I’d rather they do a loaded jump for four years than a poorly executed clean.

With squats, we look for a solid position and mobility to gain proper depth. If they can’t do a proficient back squat, why not just keep them doing a great front squat? Again, I have to say SPORT first, lifting second. Use movements and variations that develop the athlete and transfer to sport, not just some that sound good to say you have them doing but can’t be done efficiently.

Use movements and variations that develop the athlete and transfer to sport, not just some that sound good to say you have them doing but can’t be done efficiently. Share on X

In my next article on this topic, I will write about the transition from Block 2 Novice to Block 3 Advanced and Block 4 Elite. I will begin that article discussing the body weight goals and technical expectations that must be reached to qualify for graduation to those levels. I will also get further into our volume periodization programming and how we take our athletes fully into that program during blocks 3 and 4. I hope you can take what we have had success with and integrate it into your program.

If you have not read the book, “The System,” I urge you to do so. One of the authors, the great NFL strength coaching legend Johnny Parker, told me that once I used this type of programming, I would never go back. He was 100% correct. We are two years into it, and it gets better every cycle.

We have used that model as the top end of our programming. It’s what we use for our advanced and elite groups. We then reverse engineered it to peel off layers of complexity and depth, and come up with solid layered progressions that allow us to “slow cook” our athletes and fully prepare them as individuals for the rigors of high school athletics.

My hope is that if you do not already do this with your program, this will inspire you to do so. Even if you don’t do it the same way we do at YCHS, the framework is consistent and allows you to research and develop your own plan for layering your sports performance program. As always, please feel free to reach out to me with any questions or comments.

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