Blog

I’ve never been extraordinarily fast.

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

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

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

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

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

The Birth of #CoachSpeed

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

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

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

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

1. A Proper Warm-Up Matters More Than Ever

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

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

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

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

2. Recovery Between Workouts Doesn’t Happen Quickly

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

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

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

3. Time Your Rest, Too

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Tracking Data Is a Must

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

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

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

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

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

6. Celebrate Every Win, No Matter How Small

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

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

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

7. Sprinting Is Fun

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

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

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

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

8. Having a Support Network Is a Game-Changer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. There Is No Other Exercise Like Sprinting

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Dynamics of Talent

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Keeping Your ‘Next Big Things’ on Track

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the previous installments of this series on how we move our athletes through our athletic “blocking” system, I went in-depth on the process of both introducing new lifters to our Block 1 program and taking the next step to Block 2 (novice). I assume that if you are reading this article, you have already read the previous ones and are at least familiar with the “ins and outs” of the program we use and the reasons we use it.

Blocks 0–2 are the most difficult, but most imperative, ranges of development within our sports performance program. In fact, it would be perfectly feasible to stop at Block 2 of our program and run through it for the rest of the student-athlete’s time in your program. Our big “three” core movements for our Block 2’s are the hex bar deadlift, flat bench press, and front squat. Using our Tier 2 strength programming with these movements will continue to yield strength gains.

Our power-based programming would not include the full Olympic movements, but it would include variations such as pulls and loaded jumps. There are many successful programs that utilize variations only on those movements. Your athletes would continue to see positive adaptations from the programming as long as they stayed in the novice program. In fact, I’ve given advice that coincides with this statement many times when asked about programming. For a sport coach who must also program for their athletes and has a shortage of experience and/or time, this would be a perfect way to “keep it simple.”

A coach who has their athletes year-round and wants to take them to higher levels of development should use the Block 3 and 4 programs, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

For the coach who has their athletes year-round, particularly in a class setting, and is interested in taking them to higher levels of advancement and development, using Block 3 and Block 4 programs will allow those athletes to access a more “advanced placement” type of program. Just like a classroom teacher who has a class load that includes regular education and honors or AP level courses, the coach who chooses to go down this road will spend considerably more time and effort planning and implementing these levels.

Standards for Promotion to Block 3 ‘Advanced’ Level

We use the same chart for body weight to strength ratio promotion standards for promotion from Block 2 to Block 3 “Advanced” as outlined in my earlier piece for promoting from Block 1 “New Lifter” to Block 2 “Novice.” The differences in the charts are that the percentage of the combined goal must now reach 85% AND the back squat replaces the front squat as the movement that weighs in the total. As you can see, the body weight ratio goal increases with the movement change as well.

Take, for example, a large-framed athlete with a body weight of 200. His chart would look as follows:

This athlete is well above the 85% threshold. If his movement is also mastered, he will be promoted to Block 3. As a reminder, these numbers will be projected 1 rep max totals in lower blocks. In general (there have been individual exceptions), we do not 1RM test our athletes until the end of Block 2 (sophomore) in preparation for transition to Block 3. Until this point, we have projected their maxes off a “plus” set that we do at approximately 86% of their previously predicted 1RM for each of the three main movements. Once our athletes reach these standards, we graduate them to Block 3-Advanced and adjust programming to reflect the progression.

At this point, we also introduce our athletes to the use of our devices. Part of earning promotion to Novice is being awarded 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 release of coach control to a student-athlete controlled learning model.

It is absolutely imperative that each athlete has mastered each level of our squat progressions BEFORE we even think about a 1RM back squat attempt. This is something that is a non-negotiable for me. While there aren’t many requests I would straight up refuse from a sport coach without a second thought, back squat 1RM testing is one I absolutely would. Rule No. 1 of our program is “do no harm.” The back squat 1RM of an underprepared student-athlete is a recipe for disaster that I have zero interest in being part of. I urge you to buy into the “slow cook” process and not let ego or lack of knowledge by a sport coach paint you into that corner.

While there aren’t many requests I would straight up refuse from a sport coach, back squat 1RM testing an underprepared athlete is one I absolutely would, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

One other area that our Block 3’s will see move up the progression chain is Olympic movements. Up to this point, they have used variations such as the clean pull, snatch pull, or some sort of loaded jump. The purpose of this is to, once again, “slow cook” the movement for the athlete’s benefit. For us, the point of these Tier 1 speed/power movements is power development. In order to utilize the maximum benefits in this area, the athlete must have a proficient mastery of technique to achieve full triple extension and proper foot placement, etc. Short pulls, lack of extension, “star fish feet,” and/or slow robotic movements must all be worked through before promotion.

The athlete does not have to be a great Olympic weightlifter, by any means. However, they must be able to express a level of proficiency. Our Block 3’s still use pulls and jumps week to week. They also begin to use hang power cleans, hang snatches, and a hang power cleans to front squat combo during this phase.

A Review of Programming

Here is a quick overview from the last installment. For greater detail, simply review the previous article.

• Our program for all layers is a three-day-a-week split.
• We use a modified tier system that features the traditional total: upper and lower daily splits that rotate once per week through a speed/dynamic Tier 1; total strength Tier 2; and volume acclimation Tier 3.
• Tier 1: 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: Traditionally, this is a volume/hypertrophy tier. We do use this most of the time for that same programming. However, this is also a place where we work some additional Olympic/squat and/or pull variations, as dictated by our volume progression plan.
• Our yearly plan is split into four-week cycles. We use a concurrent periodization plan and train equally for power, strength, and hypertrophy together.
• We use volume as our priority way to overload. Intensity is a secondary factor and is not necessarily tied into volume, so both can be manipulated independently as needed.
• A “heavy” or “light” day or week, when describing a microcycle or day within a microcycle, does not refer to the intensity range we will be lifting, but instead 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).
• I based our program on “The System” and what I learned about this program from coaches Johnny Parker and Tony Decker.
• Bar speed is the king of transfer to sport from the weight room. We believe that using volume as our primary mode of forcing adaptation via overload is most effective in producing our desired outcome for our athletes.

Block 2 programming used volume periodization, except in our Tier 2 strength movements (see last article for details). Block 3 shifts to volume periodization for all movements going forward.

Block 3 athletes use a wave within the days of the week, based on a rotation of “heavy,” “moderate,” and “light” days. Also, the volume count breakdown now includes our hang snatch and snatch grip variations.

We divide our four-week mesocycle into weekly three-day microcycles. We set the total volume for each cycle based on a goal number (850–875 counting reps per month) that we want our elite athletes to reach by the last few cycles before their preseason. We then work backward, subtracting ~10% per cycle (with a regression cycle at the start of each new block) until we reach the number each block will start cycle 1-1 with. For Block 2 athletes, it is 520. They will climb ~10% each cycle until they reach approximately 725 total reps. Block 3 will regress back to a 630-rep monthly total and climb to the 850–875 mark before the preseason begins. Within the week, each day is also subdivided as follows:

H=Heavy; B=Big; M=Moderate; L=Light

Total volume count for Cycle 1 is 630.

During this period, we keep the intensity ranges moderate and climb each cycle by around 2% relative intensity. In Block 2, athletes spent most of their time in the 50–69% ranges, except for Tier 2 core movements. Our goal for Block 3 is for them to do most of their reps in the 70–85% range.

According to the Soviet research written about in “The System,” this is the “sweet spot” where bar speed and intensity come together at a velocity range that translates most effectively to sport. We increase the intensity slowly and cap our relative intensity for each individual movement at 2% per four-week cycle.

Using volume as periodization requires a very mathematical approach to programming. Within each day, week, and cycle, we give a percentage of volume to each of the six counting movements. We begin as follows:

You can adjust these ratios to reflect areas of need. For example, our bench press numbers lagged behind last year. Following our testing, I went into the next cycle’s spreadsheet and adjusted to add 3% more volume to our presses and simply took 1% off of three other areas to reflect the change.

Table 6 is the actual Cycle 1 sheet I use for programming Block 3. As you can see, I use formulas to ensure we hit the ranges we need. As I stated above, Block 2 athletes spent a lot of time in the “work capacity” range of 50–60% and built slowly through the “power” range of 61–69% (what we use) and a smaller amount of “strength” range 70+%, but rarely went over 85%. Block 3 athletes have progressed to the point where we don’t need as much training/work capacity range.

In this chart, the 50–59% range is only 44 total reps for the month, or 7%. Power is 27% and strength is 66%. Remember, we only count reps over 50%. We would consider any warm-up reps below that as training reps only.

As we move through the cycles of our yearly plan, we also adjust those numbers. First, by taking from work capacity and power to add greater volume in the strength zones. Then, as the preseason approaches, we begin to take from strength and add more volume to power.

The great thing about this type of programming is that it’s a mathematical process we can adjust to fit each philosophy and need, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

The great thing about programming this way is that it’s a mathematical process we can adjust to fit each philosophy and need. Squat numbers not on target? Adjust the volume. Athletes dragging? Adjust the volume. We can do the same with intensity ranges. If our cleans or snatches need work, it’s easy to regress relative intensity. You can easily make this program into whatever you, as the programmer, desire.

Here is an example of the Block 3 Advanced session from CoachMePlus:

In addition to the advancement to higher level movements, we also build more triphasic movements into our program. We usually have aspects of isometric and eccentric work built into our training, as seen above. Our yearly plan will reflect a cycle with an emphasis on isometric and another with an emphasis on eccentric. We also utilize a cycle of contrast training just before our testing in the spring for our Block 3 and 4 athletes.

Block 4

Of all our transitions, the one with the least amount of change in the day-to-day training session is moving from Block 3 to our Block 4 Elite level. This level is also the least populated of any we have. In general (a few exceptions aside), most athletes will be Block 2 as a sophomore and Block 3 as a junior. Block 4 is a little tougher to make the jump to because we consider it our “elite” standard. We have many seniors in our Block 3 who will finish their time with us at that standard.

First, we use the same body weight ratio chart as Block 3 (table 2 above), with 93% being the goal threshold. We also use the same volume progressions in both Block 3 and Block 4. Once an athlete has reached their ratio standard, they must show a higher level of proficiency in all movements than what we would expect from our Block 3’s. We really look for close to a mastery of movement, but more importantly, a standard of consistency in that movement.

For our Block 4 athletes, we really look for close to a mastery of movement, but more importantly, a standard of consistency in that movement, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

In general, our Block 4 athletes have great relative strength. Almost to the point where we say, “strong enough,” and we really don’t need that athlete to be any stronger to be great on the field. A great example is a linebacker/fullback we had last year who could full squat 585 pounds at 215 pounds of body weight, pushing almost 3x his body weight. Your coach’s eye can look at this player and say, “He is strong enough. It’s time to cut back the weight and add max velocity.”

One of the main aspects of our Block 4 programming is to actually begin to dial back the relative intensity. We look at the ratio goals of that athlete and reset his 1RM back to 100–105% of those goals. So, looking at our 215-pound linebacker with the 1RM back squat max of 585 pounds, we reset his max to 445. He then used this max as his working set, using our PUSH bands to measure meters per second and power output.

Our Block 4 athletes use velocity-based training for all their Tier 2 core movements. We shift those movements from volume as the primary consideration for progression to meters per second. We use the process I wrote about in this VBT article. Our goal for our Block 4 athletes is to increase bar speed and power output to their maximum levels. We convert our power output to reflect a body weight ratio that gives us an “output” leaderboard that gets the athletes competing. Table 7 below shows part of the spreadsheet we use to keep track of our Block 4 athlete power output records.

Table 8 shows the back squat workout records of the 215-pound linebacker I mentioned above. As you can see, he worked up to the max of 2 x 445 pounds (down from his actual 1RM of 585) on his fifth set and this let him know what adjustments to make on his sixth set. He hit three reps at above .5 m/s and dropped below his target range on his fourth rep, giving him an average set velocity of .46 m/s, just below the .5 goal for the session.

In my opinion, his fourth set was actually the set that was the most transferable to the sport. He hit 420 x 2 at .56 m/s, but he hit his peak power output as well. That’s the “trick” for our Block 4 athletes—adjusting the weight until we find that sweet spot in the range we are shooting for, combined with peak power output. Our experience has shown that this percentage is different for each individual. Using VBT is the only way to find it.

This is an example of Tier 2 programming for a Block 4 athlete. Tiers 1 and 3 would be basically identical.

At York Comprehensive High School, our program is built with the “slow cook” process as the base. While this can be frustrating for athletes and coaches who want to see results fast, it pays off when our athletes reach Block 3 and 4 at the same time that they also reach the varsity level. Our goal is NOT to create the strongest sophomores in the state. It’s to create the best-moving, most powerful and explosive athletes possible for our varsity teams. By mastering movement, moving fast, and moving strong—in that order—we hope to keep our athletes as healthy as possible and allow them to thrive as juniors and seniors.

Our goal is NOT to create the strongest sophomores in the state, but the best-moving, most powerful and explosive athletes possible for our varsity teams, says @YorkStrength17. Share on X

I truly hope you enjoyed this series of articles and it was useful to you. It may seem like a complicated process, and, at times, it is for the coach. However, you will see that just as athletes use a movement progression to become proficient, each block builds on itself and makes a natural and simple transition for the athlete. I may have left some information out that you need. If so, please feel free to reach out to me with any questions or for any clarifications.

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 ability to perform multiple repetitions of sprints or other high-intensity movements with limited rest intervals is paramount for field and court sport athletes. Successful repeated sprint performance is dependent on a balance of conflicting components of physical fitness, such as muscular strength/power and muscular-cardiovascular endurance.¹There is a requisite level of endurance capability to participate in field and court sports such as soccer, lacrosse, or hockey. However, to be successful in such sports, an athlete must be able to perform multiple bursts of high-intensity movements—primarily linear sprints, but also including change of direction, curvilinear sprints, and jump actions.

Common Measures of RSA

There are numerous repeated sprint ability (RSA) protocols, and they typically include:

1. 5-15 repetitions;
2. 5- to 15-second active duration;
3. 10- to 30-second recovery; and
4. Maximal intensity effort with each trial.

Athletes typically are tested free running, on a treadmill, or on a cycle ergometer. In a practical session, the most common variables measured during running RSA include maximal velocity and/or distance covered. Instrumented cycle ergometers allow for the measurement of peak power output, mean power output, and rates of power development. Occasionally, physiological measures are also taken, such as heart rate and lactate, and respiratory responses are paired with biomechanical measures for intensity and possible changes in efficiency. If you look through the literature, you’ll find that every piece of testing equipment can be applied to RSA, though it can create an incoherent stack of data leading to paralysis by analysis.

RSA performance can be characterized by the amount of distance or work completed or by the amount of performance decline, such as fatigue index or percent decrement. Share on X

RSA performance can be characterized by the amount of distance or work completed or by the amount of performance decline, such as fatigue index or percent decrement. It is easy to start testing and throwing numbers into these equations, but you need caution and careful interpretation to deduce what these numbers mean. Would you rather an athlete who, after several sprints, is significantly slower than on their first sprint but remains higher than their cohort, or an athlete who maintains similar speeds throughout several sprints but is always slower than their cohort?

The above equations only give you half of the picture—fatigue; they lack the ability to provide insight on meaningful performance. Anaerobic power, highest/best, and power/velocity performed have been found to be the strongest predictor of repeat sprint ability when compared to VO₂ maximal velocity at the onset of blood lactate accumulation (a metabolic transitionary threshold associated with increased reliance on anaerobic metabolism), percent decrement, anaerobic capacity (mean velocity or power output), or peak lactate production². When you really dig into the literature, you will find that out of the several training studies available, none of them truly train maximal strength or evaluate applicable maximal strength test as a factor in RSA.

I directed my graduate research to maximal strength and RSA. I evaluated different physiological and biomechanical responses to 15 repeated sprints. The sprint-to-rest ratio was 10:30 seconds, and groups were based on allometrically scaled peak force from an isometric mid-thigh pull test—a test of maximal strength and rates of force development.

The Ignored Measure for RSA – Strength

Most coaches and athletes I have met are hesitant to implement resistance training due to two main fears: 1) added body mass; and 2) increased rate of fatigue (fatigue index). There are multiple research studies that boast benefits from resistance training. However, most if not all of them target strength endurance (also associated with hypertrophic responses) and fail to consider the beneficial adaptations from maximal strength training. The benefits of maximal strength training for sprinting and endurance-based running are plentiful, though the gap in evidence for RSA fueled my research interest. Long story short, strong athletes compared to weak athletes of similar VO₂ peaks and training history produce/exhibit more advantageous results/responses.

Long story short, strong athletes compared to weak athletes of similar VO2 peaks and training history produce/exhibit more advantageous results/responses. Share on X

These responses include:

• Absolute anaerobic power (cycling peak power)
  • No statistical difference in fatigue index between strong and weak

• Relative anaerobic power (cycling peak power)
  • No statistical difference in fatigue index between strong and weak

• Absolute anaerobic capacity (cycling mean power)
  • No statistical difference in fatigue index between strong and weak

• Relative anaerobic capacity (cycling mean power)
  • No statistical difference in fatigue index between strong and weak

• Muscle oxygen recovery and rate of recovery
• Muscle oxygen usage and rate of usage

Train Slow Athletes to Repeat Slowness or Fast-Track Your Athletes for Success

Carl Valle discusses RSA and highlights effective testing and training methods for improving player performance rather than test performance. He hits the nail on the head when he states “… first you must be fast. How an athlete fatigues is only interesting if you plan to change something after you analyze the data.” I want to take the rest of the article to discuss some limitations of RSA, as well as how strength and resistance training can boost RSA. There is no doubt that strength and, more importantly, rates of force development (RFD) are limiting factors for maximal sprint performance.

The exact cause of fatigue during RSA remains elusive. The current belief is that fatigue develops due to a culmination of physiological factors, including:

1. Neural fatigue;
2. Depleted energy supply including alterations to the phosphocreatine adenosine triphosphate system (PCr-ATP), anaerobic glycolysis, and oxidative metabolism;
3. Metabolite accumulation; and
4. Muscle excitation¹.

Improving anaerobic power would be most influential on optimizing RSA. Anaerobic power is augmented by improving the ability to produce work rapidly.³ Work is related to force production; therefore, increasing force production should increase anaerobic power. This is clear when appreciating jump performance as a measure of anaerobic power. Stronger athletes produce greater power than weaker counterparts in weighted and non-weighted jump testing.^4,5

It is best to improve strength in an athlete through a logically organized and sequenced training plan. An ideal plan will be all-encompassing and synergistic and include appropriate stimulus for adaptation (resistance training, conditioning, skill practice); appropriate means to assess progress (monitoring systems); and planned rest-recovery phases, psychological reinforcement, daily nutrition, supplements, sleep, etc.⁶

Dealing with Fuel Depletion and Metabolic Acidosis

Repeat sprinting is an extreme metabolic stressor. This is repeatedly demonstrated by extended exposure to high levels of metabolic acidosis associated with elevated lactate levels, low levels of local oxygen availability, and, in response, high levels of ventilation. A major purpose of repeat high-intensity running drills is to expose athletes to metabolic stimuli that drive adaptations, such as increased buffering capacity, as well as increased PCr and glycogen storage⁷.

The long-lasting fatigue, deformation of optimized technique, and potential for injury from repeat high-intensity running drills do not outweigh the benefits they may provide. Share on X

Typically, exercises associated with these adaptations include, but are not limited to, repeated sprints, stair running, sled drags, and prowler pushes. The long-lasting fatigue, deformation of optimized technique, and potential for injury from these exercises do not outweigh the benefits they may provide. My approach to eliciting these same adaptations includes surgical-like precision in planning and execution.

You can use programming tactics to achieve adaptations while maintaining other traits with a fluctuation of concentrated and retaining loads—for example, seamless sequential integration⁸. These paradigms include logically sequenced concentrated loads that potentiate one another, with varying emphasis on desired qualities. Periods of general preparation, where training specificity is relatively low and usually accompanied by lower running volumes, typically include larger training volumes in the weight room. These larger training volumes have two major purposes: 1) accumulating training volume and work capacity (training to train); and 2) potentiating gains in strength and power during later blocks.

This phase is commonly associated with larger rep/set ranges at lower intensities (in comparison to 1 repetition maximums); for example, three sets of 10 repetitions of full range-of-motion complex lifts, such as the barbell back squat. High-volume resistance training has been linked to increased power output and repeat sprint ability. Along the same lines, there are strong correlations (that grew stronger) between maximal strength (1RM) and cycling peak power, average power of 15 rides, and average accomplished work over 15 rides (figure 3). What does this mean? Stronger athletes will be more valuable and do more for your team throughout a game, season, and quadrennial as you seek out championships.

If you have novice athletes with little to no training history, you can help foster the longevity of their career by boosting their strength, buffering capabilities, and overall endurance in the weight room. Why would you do this? Providing the athlete with a basic level of strength, work capacity, and body awareness that is adopted through resistance training will reap larger benefits when performing skill development drills. Too often, skill development drills lose their purpose when athletes are: 1) unable to maintain the intensity required and the drill regresses to a conditioning drill; and 2) unable to maintain the positions or posture required to further develop a skill such as sprinting.

Increases in work capacity can include alterations in metabolic efficiency. Following a 12-week plan of resistance training (three days per week, 3×10, bench press, hip flexor knee extension, knee flexion, push-up, leg press, lat pulldown, arm curl, parallel squat, and sit-up) elicited a 12% increase in lactate threshold⁹. Furthermore, a 10-week resistance training program targeting leg and hip strength improved maximal strength (20%–38%) and increased time until exhaustion of a cycle ergometer test. Continuing high-volume resistance training increased power output and repeat sprint ability.¹⁰

Resistance Training and Neural Adaptations

Most studies that evaluate the effects of resistance training on RSA utilize relatively light loading and high-volume schemes that primarily elicit metabolic adaptations^11,12. These training methods were found to increase RSA primarily through metabolic alterations. These improvements are valuable, though they are only a drop in the bucket of potential gains. When resistance training is programmed as an additive metabolic conditioning stimulus—aka larger set/repetition schemes combined with minimized rest intervals—minimal strength gains will be observed.

As we challenge our body to learn new skills, our brain undergoes biochemical processes to alter the number and type of motor units activated, the synchrony of recruitment, and the rate coding. Share on X

Untrained or weak individuals will more rapidly exhibit gains in strength and power due to neurological adaptations. Neural adaptations are vital to develop, as they are directly influential to force generation. As we challenge our body to learn new skills, such as producing force, our brain undergoes biochemical processes to alter the number and type of motor units activated, the synchrony of recruitment, and the rate coding (the frequency of motor unit activation).

A motor unit is simply a single nerve and all the muscle fibers that it innervates. A whole muscle is comprised of hundreds to thousands of motor units. While that seems simple, there is a complex interaction that occurs between motor unit recruitment and inhibition that allows for movement to occur. Resistance training by repeatedly exposing an athlete to concentrated loads can alter the efficiency of these recruitment strategies.

Henneman’s size principle describes how motor unit recruitment is dependent upon force production. You may be familiar with the spectrum of muscle fiber types, from slow (type I) through fast (type IIx). These different muscle fiber types require different levels of activation in order to contract.

For instance, type IIx has the highest threshold for recruitment, making it the most difficult to activate. The task demand creates high force outputs that best recruit type II muscle fibers. Using maximal strength training will create an opportunity to expose an athlete to a force production overload that they would not otherwise see in training. With concentrated training loads, this training will elicit adaptations that allow for easier activation of these units, such as modifications to the motor-endplate receptor density, quanta of neurotransmitter stored, and efficiency of neurotransmitter release and reuptake.

Neurological efficiency is also gained by enhancing the peripheral neural network to promote intramuscular coordination and intermuscular coordination. Initially, strength gains within a muscle occur by increasing the number of motor units (muscle fibers) recruited. Trained individuals can further improve their intramuscular coordination by increasing synchronization of motor unit activation.

Strength training has been found to increase motor unit synchronization, which increases rates of force development and, therefore, contraction efficiency. Intermuscular coordination—the interaction between primary muscles, synergistic muscles, and antagonistic muscle groups—also improves with resistance training. The brain coordinates multiple groups of muscles to accomplish a task, thus increasing the synchronization of activation between prime movers, which will boost peak force and, more importantly, RFD and economy.

Antagonistic muscle groups resist the forces of a movement. This means that the force required to complete a task is increased if the antagonistic muscles remain active. Following the trend of this paper, resistance training can lead to beneficial adaptations. The concept of further reducing antagonistic input thought training will allow for greater contraction velocities and performance¹³.

The above-mentioned training effects from improving strength—in particular, maximal strength—lead to enhanced work capacity, buffering properties, and neural control, which are thought to increase repetitive maximal or near maximal power output. It is nearly impossible to replicate the stimuli that are imposed during resistance training without the use of resistance training. I highlighted work capacity and maximal strength adaptations from resistance training; however, the two concentrated loads used to elicit these adaptations are contradictory if completed simultaneously.

For optimal preparedness during the most important time of the season, you should plan a logical sequence of phases with complementary concentrated loads that potentiate one another. Share on X

A logical sequence of phases should be planned with complementary concentrated loads that potentiate one another, leading to optimal preparedness during the most important time of the season. For a field or court sport, this may include:

• General Preparation Phase:
  • Non-Sport-Specific:
    • Reduced running volumes
    • Increased resistance training volumes
    • Less resistance training intensity
  • Goals:
    • Reduced impactful collisions (with other players or the ground)
    • Post season recovery
    • Muscular biochemical adaptations (glycogen storage, buffering capacity, aerobic and anaerobic enzyme activity)
    • Muscular architectural adaptions (increased CSA and pennation angles)
  • Special Preparation (Transmutation):
    • Increased sport-specific volume (running)
    • Reduced resistance training volume (approximately three sets of five reps)
    • Increased resistance training intensity
    • Goals:
      • Transfer weight room work capacity on the field or court and augment with running volume
      • Develop basic strength-related qualities
      • Overload neural drive
    • Competition Phase
      • Primarily sport-specific volume
      • Approaching maximal resistance training intensity
      • Further reducing resistance training volume
      • Goals:
        • Develop maximal strength
        • Develop maximal power
        • Increase preparedness (fitness-fatigue model)
        • WIN

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. Girard, O., Mendez-Villanueva A., and Bishop, D. “Repeated-sprint ability – Part I: Factors contributing to fatigue.” Sports Medicine. 2011;41(8):673-694.

2. da Silva, J. F., Guglielmo, L. G., and Bishop, D. “Relationship between different measures of aerobic fitness and repeated-sprint ability in elite soccer players.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2010;24(8):2115-2121.

3. Cometti, G., Maffiuletti, N., Pousson, M., Chatard, J.-C., and Maffulli, N. “Isokinetic strength and anaerobic power of elite, subelite and amateur French soccer players.” International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2001;22(1):45-51.

4. Beckham, G., Suchomel, T., Sole, C., et al. “Influence of Sex and Maximum Strength on Reactive Strength Index-Modified.” Journal of Sports Science & Medicine. 2019;18:65-72.

5. Kraska, J. M., Ramsey, M. W., Haff, G. G., et al. “Relationship between strength characteristics and unweighted and weighted vertical jump height.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2009;4(4):461. doi:10.1123/ijspp.4.4.461

6. DeWeese, B. H., Hornsby, G., Stone, M., and Stone, M. H. “The training process: Planning for strength–power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical aspects.” Journal of Sport and Health Science. 2015;4(4),308-317. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2015.07.003

7. Haff, G. G. and Triplett, N. T. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, 4th edition. Human Kinetics, Inc. 2015.

8. Wagle, J. P., Bingham, G. E., DeBusk, C. A., Lee, A. D., and DeWeese, B. H. “Seamless Sequential Integration as a Comprehensive Means of Advanced Athlete Preparation: A Case Study. Coaches College Conference, 2016.

9. Marcinik, J. E., Potts, F. J., Schlabach, F. G., Will, F. S., Dawson, F. P., and Hurley, F. B. “Effects of strength training on lactate threshold and endurance performance.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1997;23(6):739-743. doi:10.1249/00005768-199106000-00014

10. Robinson, M. J., Stone, H. M., Johnson, L. R., Penland, M. C., Warren, J. B., & Lewis, D. R. “Effects of Different Weight Training Exercise/Rest Intervals on Strength, Power, and High Intensity Exercise Endurance.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 1995;9(4): 216-221. doi:10.1519/00124278-199511000-00002

11. Edge, J., Hill-Haas, S., Goodman, C., and Bishop, D. “Effects of resistance training on H+ regulation, buffer capacity, and repeated sprints.” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2006;38(11),2004-2011.

12. Hill-Haas, S., Bishop, D., Dawson, B., Goodman, C., and Edge, J. “Effects of rest interval during high-repetition resistance training on strength, aerobic fitness, and repeated-sprint ability.” Journal of Sports Sciences. 2007;25(6):619-628.

13. Geertsen, S. S., Lundbye-Jensen, J., and Nielsen, J. B. “Increased central facilitation of antagonist reciprocal inhibition at the onset of dorsiflexion following explosive strength training.” Journal of Applied Physiology. 2008;105(3):915-922.

The first rule of strength and conditioning is “Do no harm.” A very close second rule would be “One size fits NO ONE.” This basically means if you attempt to employ a one-size-fits-all model, usually no one will benefit from it.

Taking a cookie-cutter approach to training is actually called exercising. In exercising, activity is the goal. Anything counts.

A cookie-cutter approach to training is actually called exercising. In exercising, activity is the goal. In training, our goals are individual-specific adaptations, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

In training, our goals are individual-specific adaptations to help the athlete physically and mentally prepare for the demands of their sport. Exercising will usually leave your athletes’ results up to pure chance, while training is a more calculated and monitored approach. No matter what setting you coach in, team or private, some level of individualization is non-negotiable. This is especially true when training tall athletes, such as “bigs” in basketball, middle blockers in volleyball, pitchers in baseball, and other “bigs” who are simply long-limbed compared to their peers.

Building Our Athletes

As coaches, we often talk about “building” our athletes. When it comes to building things, it’s vital to have the right tool for the job. If you need to use a screw, the right tool for the job would be the proper screwdriver. You could just use a hammer and end the job quickly, but would the long-term result be the same? The goal is not to finish the job but to do the job correctly.

The same thing goes for coaching. Athletes need to train several movement patterns and skills specific to them in order to achieve the adaptations we’re looking for from the program. So if we know we need them to improve lower body strength, that is the screw. What tool will we use? That is the exercise selection.

I know this is a blog for SimpliFaster, not HGTV, but let’s stick with this tool analogy. We know a squat will improve lower body strength. Boom. The job is done, right? Not so fast… What kind of squat will work best for that athlete? There are several types of screws that fit uniquely with several types of screwdrivers. You can fasten a Phillips screw with a flathead screwdriver, but it will damage the screw and probably take much longer than if you use a Phillips head screwdriver.

Okay, now let’s leave Home Depot and go back to the weight room.

When it comes to the popular “Big 3” lifts—squat, bench, deadlift—the unfortunate truth is that many athletes are simply not good candidates for those particular lifts. This is especially true for big and tall athletes.

Tall athletes, long-limbed athletes, and those with odd lever lengths may require some slight modifications to perform these lifts with a lower risk for error and injury. That’s not to say that tall athletes need to select totally different exercises, but rather find a way to make these lifts fit them better. Simple tweaks like a deadlift from blocks, bench pressing to a board, or squatting on a slant board can help your taller athletes perform lifts at a higher level without risk of compensation or pain.

Simple tweaks like a deadlift from blocks or bench pressing to a board can help your taller athletes perform lifts at a higher level without risk of compensation or pain, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

Find the right tool for the job. Remember, the goal of training is to TRAIN. And train hard; don’t constantly take things away from the training menu.

Principles vs. Methods

A paradigm shift that may help coaches find the right tool for the job is to evaluate the relationship of principles and methods as it connects to training. You’ve got thousands of methods to choose from, but only a handful of solid foundational principles.

For example, in a deadlift there are some things we absolutely know we do not want to occur. We don’t want to see excessive lumbar ranges of motion. We don’t want to see athletes jerking the weight off the floor. We do want to see lats, glutes, and hamstrings loaded and engaged. We want to see a neutral spine throughout the lift. We want to see a hip-dominant movement, not a knee-dominant movement.

Knowing the principles that you’re looking for actually unlocks the plethora of methods that you could potentially employ for any given athlete. In the case of tall athletes, their methods often need to be altered to be able to hold these principles intact. An easy example is a chin-up—I love chin-ups and wish I could have all of my athletes do them. But my 7-foot tall basketball players simply can’t do them because of equipment limitations. Most squat racks with chin-up bars and/or stand-alone chin-up bars are simply not tall enough to support the long limbs of a 7-footer.

One of the principles of a chin-up is to get full range of motion, which includes lowering yourself down to full arm extension. Another principle is that the athlete’s legs should be extended with ankles in dorsiflexion to hollow out the anterior core. Athletes who are 6’6” and above will have some trouble doing that on normal-sized equipment, as their feet will hit the ground before they can reach full arm extension. So, throw that method out. Go back to the principles of a vertical pulling exercise. Ask yourself what you want to have the athlete achieve with a chin-up, then find a way to accomplish that.

This is the easiest example because it’s an equipment limitation. But what happens when the athlete has a range of motion, strength, or pain threshold limitation? Below are some of the most common obstacles for big athletes while doing the “Big 3” lifts, examined with some of the root causes and simple solutions.

Back Squat

Often labeled “The King of Exercises,” the barbell back squat is a dominant choice for strengthening the lower body. It’s a main lift in most programming, especially in team settings where it can be more difficult to individualize programming.

For tall athletes, one of the major issues I’ve noticed is accomplishing good squat depth without compensation or pain—that’s a long way down for some of these athletes. And, especially for more experienced athletes who have spent a long time in sports that feature partial ranges, it may be even more foreign for them to sit deep into a squat.

For example, a basketball player who has played years upon years of basketball has spent a lot of time in basketball-specific positions. We see a lot of jumps from quarter squat (or higher) depth, a lot of wide-stance quarter-depth squats on defense, and a lot of landing and takeoffs from a single leg. Mastering these partial ranges is what makes these athletes so good at the sport, so filling the gaps in the weight room with full ranges of motion may not always come easy; however, it will leave a lasting impact on their long-term health and development.

As simple as it sounds, I want my athletes’ squats to look like squats and their hinges to look like hinges. Tall athletes often tend to hinge their squats. On squat days at the gym, you’ll hear me repetitively yelling the overly simplified coaching cue, “Let’s bend the knees today!”

It’s silly, but it’s true.

The tall athlete’s go-to compensation is to try to counterbalance their lack of knee flexion with an increase of lumbar extension. This helps the athlete feel more upright or feel like they’re getting lower, but puts the stress in the wrong areas of the body.

Video 1. Athlete performing two kettlebell front squat in learning progression for the lift.

Another common mistake is just the opposite. The athlete will fold over and lose all pillar integrity during the squat, allowing their torso to fall forward and their spine to round.

The root cause here is that knee flexion is being limited somehow. It’s our job to find out how and then correct it. Athletes often cite knee pain or tenderness as a reason for their lack of ROM. Any time an athlete is in discomfort or lacks the movement quality needed for an exercise, it’s a good idea to not only assess that region of the body, but also look at the joints that surround it.

The knee is between the ankle and the hip, so either of those two joints could also be a part of the problem and solution. Whether a lack of ankle range of motion or a lack of hip stability, it all comes down to the athlete’s inability to control their center of mass during their squat.

One of the most beneficial solutions to the tall athlete’s inability to control their COM during the squat is to start from the ground up and introduce a slant board, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

Joint assessments aside, one of the most beneficial solutions to this is to start from the ground up and introduce a slant board for tall athletes to squat on. This will help the athletes access more knee range of motion, especially if their ankle was the limiting factor to begin with. In turn, athletes will be able to achieve a better squat and then gain more strength and stability, which often leads to a reduction of aches and pains during training.

Terminology update: You may call it a slant board, some call it a heel lift, others call it a squat wedge. Whatever you call it, it’s a great tool for taller athletes!

Video 2. Example of front squatting with a slant board. Here, the athlete is returning from a knee dislocation.

It is extremely important to actually invest in a slant board. Elevating the heels with small weight plates is often mistaken as an equal alternative, but it’s not the same. A slant board places the ankle in a slightly dorsiflexed position and allows the athlete’s entire foot to be on the same surface. This helps athletes produce force as if it were on the ground while still adding the benefits at the ankle joint.

Elevating heels on plates places the ankle in a similar position, but the ball of the foot is on the ground while the heel of the foot is on the plate—a completely different surface—and the mid-foot floats in thin air between the two. This does not allow for optimal usage of the athlete’s whole foot during the squat. There are several “leaks” with this setup.

Any squat variation is perfectly compatible with a slant board, from bilateral to unilateral options, but the goal is to eventually train without it. Use it to help athletes strengthen their weaknesses and move to squat variations that don’t require them to constantly use lifting aids.

Bench Press 

The bench press is a lift that many coaches love to demonize and push athletes away from. It’s bad for your shoulders. It’s not sport-specific. It’s not athletic.

The way I see it, any lift can be bad for athletes if repeatedly done incorrectly or misused. If a bench press checks the boxes you’re looking for, go for it. If you have a tall athlete who struggles to meet the principles of a bench press, there are plenty of helpful options that can assist them.

If you have a tall athlete who struggles to meet the principles of a bench press, there are plenty of helpful options that can assist them, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

One of the biggest roadblocks for long-armed athletes while benching is constantly being stricken with shoulder pain. This pain can often be pinpointed to an anterior humeral glide during the bottom portion of the bench press.

Anterior humeral glide occurs frequently on pushing and pulling exercises where the athlete lacks control and retraction of their shoulder blades. In a bench press, this happens at the bottom phase of the lift. The humerus actually slides forward in relation to the shoulder socket, rather than staying centered. This forward motion of the top of the humerus can irritate the shoulder structures, but it can most commonly cause tendonitis of the biceps tendon that attaches in that joint.

Even for athletes with great technique, their structures may win in the end. Some athletes’ arms are so long, they literally cannot lower the bar fully to their chest without shifting the humerus forward to get that deep.

In these cases, we just raise the level of the chest by adding a board(s) or a block(s) to the lift. By finding the point of the eccentric phase where the compensation occurs, we can use those tools to elevate the end point of that lift and allow athletes to bench press compensation-free.

Video 3. Bench pressing with a block to raise the chest level in the lift.

In most cases, all we end up doing is taking out excess range of motion for the athlete, so the focus remains on the proper muscle groups. If we take away too much range of motion, it becomes triceps dominant rather than chest dominant, and in those rare cases, you may want to completely scrap the barbell and use dumbbells instead.

Again, you don’t have to bench press. You can floor press with a barbell or dumbbells. You can perform loaded push-ups. You can perform cable chest work. There is no shortage of pressing variations. But I know a ton of athletes who absolutely love to bench press. Motivation and enjoyment are a huge piece of training, so if you can safely keep a fan-favorite exercise in the mix, that’s always a good thing.

Deadlift

Last, but definitely not least, comes the deadlift—one of the biggest bang-for-your-buck exercises in a coaching toolbox. The question is, which kind of deadlift?

Deadlifts are to training as shrimp are to Bubba (you know, Forrest Gump’s dear friend).

You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, saute it… [There’s] shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo. Pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried. There’s pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich.

There are so many ways to deadlift. Different bars, different stances, different ranges of motion, different speeds, etc. As always, the key is to find what fits your tall athletes the best.

There are so many ways to deadlift. Different bars, stances, ranges of motion, speeds, etc. As always, the key is to find what fits your tall athletes the best, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

The word “tall” is simply an umbrella term for someone who is, well, tall. But there are different kinds of tall. Two people can be the same height, but have two completely opposite structures. One is all legs with a short torso, the other could be more proportionate. Those two people may need to lift differently, whether height is an issue or not.

When it comes to the deadlift and taller athletes, back pain is a big complaint that coaches usually hear. One of the biggest causes of low back pain during a deadlift is simply using an improper setup for the athlete. Actually, this can be true for any athlete of any size.

When athletes are too long or can’t get wedged into a good deadlift position, the main compensation we see is loading the quads more than the hamstrings. Because of their long legs and arms, some athletes are forced into a squatty deadlift, which actually puts an immense amount of stress in the lumbar spine.

Picture an athlete in this squatty deadlift start position. Their knees are deeply bent, hips are low, torso is upright, and they begin their initial pull. The first thing that usually happens is the bar goes nowhere on the initial pull, but the hips raise up. This results in a loss of lat tension, hamstring tension, and possibly core engagement. Then, the bar finally starts to come off the floor, but the levers being used are more low back dominant than hamstring and glutes.

Video 4. Example of the hips shooting up while performing a deadlift.

Repetitively doing this will probably start to irritate the low back. Worst case scenario, the athlete may experience disc herniations and all of the complications that could come from that. Best case scenario, they adapt and overly develop their spinal erectors and QL’s, which also has its pros and cons.

For your big athletes, Romanian deadlift variations can take over as the go-to “deadlift” exercise. I recently wrote about why we use the single leg RDL as a main lift and all of the benefits we’ve seen since doing so. Although a deadlift and Romanian deadlift share a common word, they are actually not directly related. Cousins, maybe. But not siblings.

The RDL is a top-down movement. The deadlift is a ground-up movement. One is more eccentric in nature, the other focused more on concentric strength. There is still a great benefit from an actual deadlift due to the extreme amounts of concentric strength athletes can build.

If the deadlift fits your program better than an RDL, you can use the same approach as the bench press by elevating the floor. Using boxes, blocks or plates or even a snatch grip, you can help elevate the height of the bar to fit your tall athlete’s optimal deadlift position. This will allow them to truly hinge at the hips and get the proper pulling position to be able to load the hamstrings and glutes more than the quads and lower back.

Another great tool to introduce would be a trap bar, because it comes built-in with high & low handle heights and could help the tall athlete find their perfect setup, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

Another great tool to introduce would be a trap bar, because it comes built-in with high and low handle heights and could help the athlete find their perfect setup. The downside is that the trap bar is naturally kind of a hybrid deadlift, kind of a middle ground between posterior and anterior chain dominance. That turns a lot of coaches away from using the trap bar, but I’ve found that it’s a great option with no major drawbacks.

Video 5. Tall athlete performing a trap bar deadlift using bumper plates to raise the floor.

Training Your “Bigs”

I’ve been extremely lucky to work with some incredible—and tall—athletes over the years. A lot of what I’ve talked about in this article was the result of trial and error, plus strong communication with the athletes. I love to get their feedback and learn how I can better serve them, straight from the source. After so many conversations, you really start to notice trends among this unique population.

The most prominent and fulfilling feedback I’ve received regarding some of these modifications is the noticeable reduction of pain. Many athletes simply don’t know or forget what it feels like to feel good. Helping them get back on track and move the needle in the right direction is one of the most important things we can do for our athletes.

The domino effect from this is the real deal. When athletes feel better, they perform better. We often get hung up on the shiny objects of training. I want my athlete’s RSI to go up, I want their vertical jump to increase, I want their 40 time to get faster. We use force plates to measure this, we use VBT to track that, and so on and so forth. But we often overlook the low-hanging fruit, which is health drives performance. Sometimes, all of those things will naturally happen simply because the athlete feels better.

The “Big 3” lifts are called that for a reason. They are big, compound lifts that yield great results for athletes, from beginner to pro. They are also extremely scalable and great for use in team or large group settings. The squat pattern, upper body pressing pattern, and hip hinge pattern are irreplaceable. Their benefits build the foundation not only for weight room performance, but also athletic performance and in-game strength.

Remember: We need to find the right tool. If one of these major lifts isn’t the right tool, we can mimic the movement pattern in another lift that may be a better fit, says @JustinOchoa317. Share on X

With that being said, remember we need to find the right tool. If one of these major lifts isn’t the right tool, we can mimic the movement pattern in another lift that may be a better fit. After all, that is what coaching is all about: problem solving, communicating, and finding ways to empower our athletes by any means. When it comes to working with tall athletes with limitations on the Big 3 lifts, these small tweaks have delivered big results.

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