Blog

I’ll just skip any warmup and get to the meat and potatoes: I’m happy to write an unaffiliated review of the VOLTRA I resistance training technology by Beyond Power—one of the most versatile, highly beneficial pieces of equipment I’ve ever come across.

Usually, when I’m writing reviews or telling a coach about a tool they may want to consider integrating, it’s generally coming from a specific place. A lot of the time, that perspective sits somewhere on the “hey, this really can add some value to what you do” or the “maybe this could be useful and worth exploring” areas of the spectrum.

The VOLTRA I is a Swiss Army Knife of resistance training technology all in one convenient little package, smaller than a shoebox, says @rewirehp. Share on X

However, there are a few instances where something truly stands out and gets me excited enough that I find myself jumping to the “must try” tier. I’m happy to report that the VOLTRA I is absolutely in that latter category for athletes, individuals, practitioners, and coaches alike.

What Does the VOLTRA I Do? Features & Functionality

The VOLTRA Iis a Swiss Army Knife of resistance training technology all in one convenient little package, smaller than a shoebox.

The high-level overview of the machine is that it offers various resistance settings to capture benefits generally seen in separate machines.

These include traditional cable machine resistance, lighter resistance modes for speed (think Vertimax), eccentric-overload aka flywheel settings, chain resistance, as well as adaptive isokinetic resistance. Some of those have been added over time to my pre-existing unit (they’re still in startup mode) via their software upgrades with potentially more to come in time. I’ll do my best to summarize the various features here.

• • Weight Training Mode feels like an ultra-smooth cable machine. Think Keiser Functional Trainer-esque. This would be like traditional isotonic resistance you can preload prior to performing an exercise.

 

• • You can add a flywheel feeling component by adding additional resistance to the eccentric portion of the movement.

 

• • You can also add a chain-resistance-mimicking setting to this mode where resistance gets heavier the further you progress through the concentric phase of movement—similar to real chains on, say, a squat.

 

• • Damper Mode simulates the resistance experienced during a parachute run with resistance increasing as speed increases.

 

• • Resistance Band Mode sees the resistance increase as the range of motion increases, akin to a literal resistance band. This is ideal for movements where speed is the goal, such as loading a first step, lateral push off, and other athletic patterns.

 

• Isokinetic Mode provides adaptive resistance to the user on the concentric phase of movement with no eccentric load. This means the harder the user pulls or pushes, the more resistance the machine offers in order to adapt to the user’s given capabilities. This is highly useful as each rep is a living, adaptable, relative max. It’s also pragmatic because multiple athletes of various physical abilities can work on the same machine concurrently.

Those are the main settings; the machine, however, also has other qualities that really tie everything together.

Weight Training Mode feels like an ultra-smooth cable machine. Think Keiser Functional Trainer-esque. This would be like traditional isotonic resistance you can preload prior to performing an exercise, says @rewirehp. Share on X

The various attachments and accessories are very helpful. I’m a big fan of the rack attachments (including the new one that rotates in whatever direction it’s pulled for cleaner movement setups) as well as the base for vertical plane of movement exercises. The various settings are largely intuitive, with some light experimentation, so the whole thing is quite user friendly. Even some of the more functional/practical settings like the cable rollback are reasonably easy to figure out on your own. All in all, it was nice to dive into a piece of technology without feeling overwhelmed in start-up mode.

Who Is It For?

I personally view the VOLTRA I as something that’s soon-to-be ubiquitous across virtually all physical fitness, rehabilitation, and performance arenas with benefits to offer everybody.

It certainly has a place in home fitness due to the minimal fingerprint and sheer amount of boxes it can help you check (cable machine, flywheel, isokinetic machine, Vertimax-type settings, chain resistance mimetic).

That same Swiss Army Knife offering of features plus the minimal footprint makes it ideal for boutique gyms and training studios that want to integrate various pieces of equipment with those features but may not have adequate floor space.

Speaking of the portability and small footprint aspect relative to features, the machine should legit be considered a must-have for all mobile or pop-up trainers. Those familiar with the scarce resources for some professional sports training staff when on the road (e.g., in the NBA) are likely already thinking of this as something they can bring along on road trips for sports teams. This has implications for pre-game prep and being able to get athletes sufficient post-game load on the road. I can see tissue recruitment/potentiation and movement prep benefits prior to competition as a key area it addresses.

The performance benefits make the VOLTRA I an ideal choice for athletes as well as those who train them. This can include speed coaches, strength and conditioning coaches, and rehabilitation specialists who want a reasonably cost-effective, convenient solution for reconditioning and return-to-play needs. The isokinetic mode in particular—being able to match the output of the user—means athletes are offered scaled challenges relative to the level of their present abilities.

I personally view the VOLTRA I as something that’s soon-to-be ubiquitous across virtually all physical fitness, rehabilitation, and performance arenas with benefits to offer everybody, says @rewirehp. Share on X

There’s more that could be said here because the device can benefit so many populations with so many use cases, but I think the best way to put it is that I use it daily and have trouble thinking of demographics who wouldn’t benefit from the technology.

How Do I Integrate The VOLTRA I Into My Programming With Athletes?

Arguably, the in-the-trenches coaching experience is the most important part when evaluating equipment. Here are some of the ways I’ve been integrating the VOLTRA I on the applied side.

From a logistics standpoint, I’ve enjoyed using it as a separate station at my gym. Having a more or less zero footprint machine that doesn’t take up real estate has made coaching groups even easier to navigate. On that same practical side of the coin, I’ve enjoyed the mobile aspect of the device for pop-up, off-site training. Once the outdoor attachment is ready, I plan on traveling with it.

As far as how I use it with clients, the modes I use the most are:

• • The traditional weight training mode (akin to a cable machine)

 

• • The added eccentric overload (the flywheel-type setting)

 

• The isokinetic mode

While, conceptually, I’m a huge fan of the Damper Mode, the length of the cable makes it better suited for loaded dynamic exercises and plyometrics as opposed to literal loaded sprinting. Perhaps a future update is in the works there?

Video 1. The VOLTRA I works just as well for sagittal and vertical displacement exercises as it does for horizontal force vectors. Here, the athlete is using the eccentric overload (flywheel stand-in) adjustment of Weight Training mode.

I’ve absolutely loved doing vertical displacement exercises on the platform using the flywheel/eccentric setting for training the brakes during the downward phase of vertical jumping as well as simply building general strength for squat variations. I also like having athletes do split squat variations with their hands on either side of the rack (hand supported split squats).

Having a more or less zero footprint machine that doesn’t take up real estate has made coaching groups even easier to navigate, says @rewirehp. Share on X

Another movement I’ve really enjoyed using the machine for is lateral lunge and lateral lunge/row combos with slant boards under the plant leg to develop competency in the frontal plane and change of direction activities.

Video 2. Using this movement not only for general strength, but also to capture intent, the appropriate muscle sets, and proper bony alignments for frontal plane competency prior to doing frontal plane athletic patterns/dynamics. This is an adaptive resistance isokinetic mode with no eccentric load so as not to fatigue the athlete as much prior to plyometric activity.

I tend to use a mix of the weight training with eccentric overload as well as the isokinetic mode for this.

Of course, I enjoy using the general weight training mode for simple things like single arm cable presses from a staggered stance as well as staggered stance cable rows. I should also mention that I only have one unit at the time of this writing, though the dual unit movements unlock so much more exercise selection possibilities and/or stations.

The isokinetic mode might be my favorite. I love the idea of the adaptable resistance and each rep being a relative max for both general strength and tissue recruitment purposes. The concept of each rep offering maximal resistance through the entire range of motion is also huge for rehab due to being able to strengthen each joint angle.

The unloaded eccentric component means there will likely be less delayed onset muscle soreness than you might expect from an eccentric version of this or from flywheels.

Thus, I also see this as a phenomenal way to microdose strength work in-season for athletes without taxing their CNS or physiology on the whole quite as much. Speaking of in-season and pop-up training options, I like the idea of bringing this on the court (or field) as a way to achieve tissue recruitment, loaded movement prep, and going beyond the typical pre-game routines.

Video 3. Weight Training (cable feel) mode.

This whole section is still a living document, but hopefully this gets prospective users excited about a lot of different possibilities on the rehab-to-performance spectrum.

Specs: Cost Breakdown and Room for Development Moving Forward

When you factor in everything it does, the VOLTRA I is ultra-affordably priced at $2,099, with the ability to net two for dual-pulley setups for $4,774 (at the time of this writing). You will need to pay à la carte to add accessories, be it a platform, travel bag, 3D omnidirectional rack setup, and more. That’s going to be easily within budget for those who were already planning to add various types of equipment to their offerings, but could be something other trainers need to save for.

The good news is that it has so many helpful features and functions, while being incredibly efficient to house and move, that all of these factors collectively bump it up near the top of the benefits-relative-to-cost equipment power rankings.

So far, the Beyond Power team has been amazingly receptive to input about everything from features to functionality. I’ve brought to their attention the need for a pop-up mobile training attachment for trees, fences, poles, etc. and that’s in the works. I’ve also brought up an ultra-mild software issue (the equipment got a little extra warm once), and their support team has gone above and beyond to ensure I experienced no further issues.

As a practitioner, I’m not sure I’ve ever encountered such a receptive team in the sports technology space. It really is this—the quality of the team and their drive to problem solve for the end consumer—that makes me believe Beyond Power will not only take the resistance training technology market by storm as a lead product, but also have a ton of staying power.

As coaches, a lot of the time we are used to techies coming in and trying to “disrupt” fitness, but Beyond Power has an excellent onboard mix of both technological specialists and those who understand the actual needs of coaches—I could not ask for a better team behind the brand.

If there is one thing I haven’t been in love with so far (but is fixable) is the platform for squatting and vertical displacement/sagittal dominant movement (e.g., curls, split squats, rtc.). If newbies aren’t careful about having their mass on the deck when they load it, the deck can get pulled upwards from under them. Ideally, a solution able to bolt the deck down would be great, or a way to make the loading phase something easier for one person to do (such as in the form of a remote) rather than a probable two-person undertaking. Again, something that is most definitely fixable from a software and/or hardware standpoint that’s easy enough to navigate in the meantime with a bit of mild supervision.

Parting Shots

I’ve written reviews before and I’ve told other coaches about equipment I use and recommended they integrate certain things—but I’m not sure I’ve ever been so much in the camp of “you gotta try this” about anything else I’ve reviewed. There are a handful of things I can think of in this category for sure, but few that offer such a wide array of benefits to so many potential users.

I’m not sure I’ve ever encountered such a receptive team in sports technology. The team’s quality and drive to problem solve makes me believe Beyond Power has a ton of staying power, says @rewirehp. Share on X

The wide array of features and holes plugged by one machine speak for themselves. So does the corresponding collection of use cases and those whom it can help. The ease-of-integration level grades out very high with comparatively low costs involved, user-friendliness, minimal footprint, portability, and convenience factors.

While the price may not be something everybody will be able to pull off on a whim, it’s many times more cost-effective than buying all the equipment needed to execute what this one singular unit does (cable machine, Vertimax, flywheel, isokinetic machine, and more).

I think for me, the only thing I like to also have in addition to the VOLTRA I (as someone who has a physical gym space and isn’t as mobile) is at least one Keiser Functional Trainer in order to have more stations going at once and because you may not be able to move your racks to accomplish more distance between two VOLTRA units for certain movements (e.g., cable row/press variations).

But aside from that (and that may be a less common want relegated to some biomechanics-lead coaches), integrating the VOLTRA I is a no-brainer. My advice would be to find a local coach that has a unit so you can try it first (I’m hoping the team adds local channel partners/places you can demo the tech) before making a call on purchasing.

In summation, I’m confident the VOLTRA I adds a ton of value for both trainer and trainee alike.

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

It’s often said, in both academic and practical work, that coaches are performers in their own right. Like athletes, coaches are required to manage their emotions and actions under pressure to deliver the performances their athletes need to then deliver their own exceptional performances. This is even true in the daily performance environments; coaches are required to motivate the athletes they work with while providing feedback and instruction, all of which may require some elements of a performance.

We often feel that asking for help is a sign of weakness, but, instead, it’s a crucial part of developing our performance potential and becoming experts, says @craig100m. Share on X

Similarly, if a coach has a bad day—their mood is low, or they’re tired—their ability to effectively coach (i.e., their performance) will likely suffer. Like any performer, success does not come without practice, and a disciplined approach to developing the knowledge and skills to deliver the required performance, at the required time, is needed to truly deliver high-performance outcomes.

If an athlete came to you and wanted to improve their performance, you’d likely suggesting coaching in some capacity—maybe even your own coaching services. And yet, as coaches, we’re often not open to being coached ourselves. This is somewhat of a paradox: we know that coaching enhances performance, and we know that coaches are performers…and yet coaches very rarely have their own coaches.

Coaching the Coaches

Cody Royle, who views himself as a coach of head coaches, is trying to change this through his most recent book, Second Set of Eyes, which delivers an essential, compelling argument for why coaches need a coach. Royle refers to his coaching practice as a second set of eyes; someone who is focused on the individual’s coaching skills and how effective they are.

Typically, this is more focused on what we might term the “softer” skills of coaching—i.e., the how to coach as opposed to what to coach, such as interpersonal skills and the coach’s own well-being (and I often find it ironic, given all coaches know about human performance, that they often fail to apply this knowledge to themselves). This also includes their overall leadership ability—a crucial, but often under-considered, aspect of coaching. According to Royle, modern coaching—especially at the highest level—is no longer about the Xs and Os, but often focused on leading athletes and staff across the organisation, which requires developing leadership potential, maximising wellbeing, and relentlessly pursuing new knowledge.

As Royle writes in the prologue, “Winning in the current landscape is not about your individual brilliance; it’s derived from your ability to elicit collective greatness from every person within your organisation.” Are you good at this? How do you know? How do you improve? That’s the job of your second set of eyes, your coach.

If an athlete came to you and wanted to improve their performance, you’d likely suggesting coaching... And yet, as coaches, we’re often not open to being coached ourselves, says @craig100m. Share on X

In the first chapter proper of the book, Royle identifies the biggest myth in coaching—essentially, that we can do it all ourselves. We often believe that there is a linear relationship between hard work and success, with more always being better. Royle terms this Chronic Individualism, which is characterised by being a workaholic, things never being good enough, and an endless search for more. We often think that doing these things makes us strong leaders, but we’re not—we’re broken and burnt out, which means we can’t perform to the best of our ability, and we therefore let our athletes down. We think that we’re tough because we demonstrate absolute self-reliance and total availability.

I’d argue, as I’m sure Royle would, that working hard all of the time is paradoxically lazy—it’s easy to work hard, but it takes far more courage to set boundaries, focus on what is actually important, and ensure you can perform at your best. Royle provides the example of Emma Hayes, the incredibly successful soccer coach who only had eight weeks off following the birth of her son (and the stillbirth of his twin) before returning to elite coaching—largely due to the culture of chronic individualism that pervades elite sport. However, since becoming a mother, Hayes has developed a whole new perspective with regards to compassion—both to others and herself. She now better understands that her role as an elite coach is to create an environment that can operate successfully without her—a big shift away from chronic individualism that allows her, and those she works with, to perform at their best.

Part of this myth of coaching is due to what research has identified as the greed of coaching: the duties often associated with being an elite coach are highly demanding, both in terms of time and energy, such that the person can’t dedicate any further time or energy to things outside of work (such as their family, friends, hobbies, or health). It’s common to view what happens inside sport as separate from what happens outside—but, to the individual, they aren’t. Stress at home can lead to underperformance in the job; similarly, spending time building bonds with people in your personal life can make it much easier to build bonds in your professional life. Speaking from experience, I find that being a parent gives you lots of transferable skills to sports coaching—so, the more I can be a present parent, the better I can become at coaching.

So, what’s the solution?

We need to move away from the culture of always working, from individuality and self-reliance, to the opposite poles—protecting time away from work, working as part of a larger group, and sharing the load, says @craig100m. Share on X

Royle highlights that we need to move away from the culture of always working, from individuality, self-reliance, and almost competitive presenteeism (“who can work the longest?”) to the opposite poles—protecting time away from work, working as part of a larger group, and sharing the load. This includes bringing in an additional set of eyes, often as a way of forcing you to make these changes. And by making these changes, you allow the rest of the performance staff to grow, as a true leader should—making it even easier for you to protect your non-work time.

Dedicated Practice and Objective Feedback

In the second chapter of the book, Royle outlines how great coaches actually get coached. He draws on the work of Anders Ericsson, whose pioneering work explored mastery and deliberate practice. Ericsson found that experts have coaches who can provide constructive feedback, who can identify an aspect of performance that requires improvement, and who challenge them to drive to higher levels. Ericsson’s work highlighted the importance of feedback, with experts being hungry to receive feedback as a way of enhancing their growth.

The issue for head coaches is that, by virtue of the job title, people already believe they are experts. They believe you don’t have self-doubt or performance anxiety, and that you don’t need feedback, says @craig100m. Share on X

The issue for head coaches, however, is that, by virtue of the job title, people already believe they are experts. They believe you don’t have self-doubt or performance anxiety, and that you don’t need feedback (or, at least, that it’s not their job to provide feedback). This can make it hard for head coaches to develop their own expertise—they actually can’t get the constructive feedback they need to improve. This is why it is crucial to have a person—a second set of eyes—who can seek out and provide the feedback needed in a format you’re most likely to listen to. But it’s also crucial that the coach is open to receive the feedback and deliberately carves out the space and time to actively work on themselves. This is another reason why the myth of being able to do everything ourselves is harmful—it reduces the time and energy we can dedicate to our own development. As Royle writes in this chapter, the best player development is coach development. By developing ourselves, we can better drive our team to success.

In a later chapter, Royle then moves on to what the primary skills of a second set of eyes are. The most common way that coaches, including head coaches, seek to improve their performance is through developing their technical skills via traditional learning methods—a course or a seminar, for example, focused on, say, training session design. However, to truly develop a high-performance coach, Royle believes it’s far more effective to understand—and therefore develop—the human qualities required to be an exceptional coach.

Royle describes elite coaching as “high performance knowledge work” (“knowledge work” being the term developed by management guru Peter Drucker to describe how a person’s work expands the knowledge available to a given organisation). Essentially, as a head coach, your ability to think provides the most value to your team. This is similar to research from coaching science experts Andrew Abrahams and Dave Collins, who wrote in a 2011 paper that a key skill for coaches is in their decision-making ability. This decision making can either be classical (termed CDM – classical decision making), in which we have time to weigh various options, or naturalistic (NDM – naturalistic decision making), which is about using intuition and heuristics to make decisions quickly with imperfect information. This requires a variety of mental skills and abilities, such as attentional capacity and control, pattern recognition, memory, intuition, creativity, and self-regulation (of both emotions and behaviours). It also requires us to communicate effectively and be very self-aware.

Anyone who is a parent will tell you that, when your kids get tired, their self-regulation goes out of the window. And the same is true for adults, including coaches—the more tired we are, the worse we are at making decisions. Decision making is what makes us good at our jobs, and yet we consistently allow ourselves to be placed in environments that degrade our ability to make those decisions well. Taking time to work on yourself and having the self-discipline to be healthy and happy seem selfish, but by not doing this, you are harming your own performance. By proxy, you’re harming those you’re tasked with developing and leading. We need to start viewing the coach as a performer, and, as result, set aside time to improve our performance through dedicated practice. We often feel that asking for help is a sign of weakness, but, instead, it’s a crucial part of developing our performance potential and becoming experts.

Working hard all of the time is paradoxically lazy—it’s easy to work hard, but it takes far more courage to set boundaries, focus on what’s actually important, and ensure you can perform at your best, says @craig100m. Share on X

This is what a second set of eyes can do. They can provide you with an objective assessment and perspective on what good looks like, where you are now relative to that, and how to improve. This can include how to optimise your self-awareness, communication, and decision making, which allows you to create better coaching sessions (and, as a result, spend less time working because you’re more effective with the time you do have). Meanwhile, this also ensuring your wellbeing is optimised to support your coaching performance, which, in turn, allows your success to be sustained. You’re far less likely to experience burnout and/or mental ill-health—aspects that we’re quick to protect our athletes from, but not ourselves.

Performance Equals Potential Minus Interference

In the final two chapters, Royle introduces Gallwey’s Equation (from the book The Inner Game of Tennis):

Performance = Potential – Interference

The role of the second set of eyes, for Royle, is to guide the coach in eliminating—or at least reducing—interference. This, in turn, places the coach in a state where they can achieve peak performance. This involves developing intuition (the NDM I mentioned earlier), which better prepares coaches to read people, and, ultimately, teams. The coach themselves may also be the interference, as reflected in a quote by Danny Kerry:

“The thing that often gets in the way of performance is the coach. The coach will do an awful lot to prepare the team, but often they’re the handbrake or the glass ceiling.”

Again, elite coaches can use a second set of eyes—their own coach—to ensure they’re not the issue that limits the performance of the athlete or team they work with.

Elite coaches can use a second set of eyes—their own coach—to ensure they’re not the issue that limits the performance of the athlete or team they work with, says @craig100m. Share on X

Overall, Royle’s latest book really resonated with me. I’ve been working with my own coach for over two years now, to better prepare me for my two key roles, one as a team leader and one as a lead coach. Through the process, I’ve undertaken a 360 feedback process, which enabled me to better hone in on my strengths and understand my weaknesses. I’ve become better at dealing with difficult situations and managing complexity.

Alongside my main coach, I’ve utilised a secondary coach to build my capability to design and deliver training sessions that work towards the end goal that I’m trying to achieve. This coaching has been incredibly useful to me—I don’t think I’d be where I am today without it. As a result, I am in full agreement with Royle regarding the need for a second set of eyes. For me, every high performance coach should actively be working on their own development, but, crucially, this development rarely needs to be technical in nature (or at least not solely). I’d recommend that everyone involved in sport read this book, reflect on the core messages, and then take steps to improve their own performance. Coaches are, after all, performers in their own right—it’s about time we treated ourselves as such.

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 2024, both the NBA Combine and the CFL Combine switched from the Vertec to The Top Hopper Vertical Jump System for their vertical jump tests. Many other combines have also made the same switch. At the NBA Combine, athletes are routed to two vertical jump stations:

Station #1: Max Vertical Jump – Here, the NBA Combine uses a Top Hopper TH500 Floor Stand System with an extension tube to measure the running max vertical jump. The standard configuration can measure a jump height up to 147.5 inches. Adding the extension tube safely raises the measuring device another two feet off the ground.

Station #2: Sargent Jump – This station measures a stationary Sargent Jump. They use a Top Hopper TH500 Floor Stand System in combination with Hawkin force plates. They use the TH500 to accurately measure the vertical jump height and use the force plates for jump performance data.

Feedback from the strength and conditioning coaches that ran the stations was very positive—they said the stations went very fast this year and everyone loved it!

A vertical jump measuring device must be accurate, repeatable, and reproducible, says Scott Mervis. Share on X

I entered the world of measuring vertical jump heights about eight years ago—I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering and was a basketball coach for many years. After buying several vert testers and talking with thousands of trainers and strength and conditioning coaches, I have a very good understanding of the marketplace. Please allow me to share what I have learned.

The 3 Qualities Experts Demand From a Vertical Jump Measuring Device

It must be:

1. ACCURATE – If an athlete can jump 42 inches, then the equipment must measure 42 inches. The measurement tolerance must be +/- a half inch. For example, the equipment should measure 41.5 – 42.5 inches.
2. REPEATABLE – The equipment must deliver the same measurements every time when using the same operator, athlete, process, and procedure. If you cannot repeat the measurements, then you cannot calculate the accuracy of your equipment and will never have reproducibility.
3. REPRODUCIBLE – The equipment must be reproducible. If the same equipment and procedure is used, an athlete’s vertical jump height should measure the same height regardless of location and operator. For example, if a trainer replicates the same procedure used at the NBA Combine and uses the same equipment, then the athlete should have the same vertical jump height measurement at both locations.

Trainers and strength and conditioning coaches basically have two requirements:

1. It must be accurate. “Why would I use a vert tester to measure vertical jump heights if the measurements are not accurate.”
2. It must be easy to use. “My time is limited, so it can’t take long to get the measurement.”

Market Segmentation

What vertical jump measuring equipment does everyone use? That is a great question. These numbers are not exact, but close enough for our purposes.

Vertical jump testers are either:

1. Mechanical – These are moved up and down manually and have plastic indicators the athlete hits to identify the measurement location. The operator has to manually calculate the vertical jump height.
2. Electronic – These provide a digital measurement that has a complex calculation built into the equipment processor.

All types of equipment have pros and cons. Every trainer and strength and conditioning coach has a reason for why they use a certain piece of equipment. The NBA Combine is no different.

After six years of designing, testing, and improving, The Top Hopper vertical jump measuring system was launched. All of the complaints that coaches had about the Vertec were targeted and eliminated, says Scott Mervis. Share on X

Pros & Cons of Force Plates, Contact Mats, and Mechanical Jump Testers

Let’s first start with the oldest products. In the late 1970’s, force plates entered the market. Force plates are designed to provide data on the athlete’s strength, movement, asymmetries, and balance. To say it another way, force plates measure the ground reaction forces applied during the jump.

If you are looking for an accurate vertical jump measurement, force plates are not the right piece of equipment. If you are looking to collect data on jump performance, then you have to get force plates. Share on X

The ground reaction forces and flight time are used to calculate vertical jump height. Unfortunately, the calculated height is always several inches below the actual height measured against a mechanical tester. So, if you are looking for an accurate vertical jump measurement, force plates are not the right piece of equipment. If you are looking to collect data on jump performance, then you have to get force plates.

Pros:
• Best piece of equipment for analyzing jump performance.
• Eliminates human “math” errors when measuring.
• Delivers repeatable and reproducible measurements.

Cons:

• Delivers an inaccurate vertical jump height (~3 inches lower).
• Can only measure a stationary Sargent jump.
• Vertical jump height is a calculation.
• Very easy to cheat the vertical jump height calculation.
• Most expensive—requires an annual software subscription.
• Heavy and not easily portable.
• Highest level of technical knowledge required to use.

Contact mats were introduced in the early 1990s. They use pressure-sensitive sensors to detect when an athlete leaves and then lands back on the mat. The system includes a timing mechanism to record the duration of the jump. The flight time analysis is used to calculate the jump height.

Pros:
• Easily portable.
• Eliminates human “math” errors when measuring.
• A low-cost electronic vert tester.

Cons:

• Without a VERY controlled procedure, they deliver the least accurate vertical jump height—jump heights can very drastically depending on athlete’s body position.
• Can only measure a stationary Sargent jump.
• Vertical jump height is a calculation.
• Very easy to cheat the vertical jump height calculation.
• Durability issues.

Today, the new 'Gold Standard' is The Top Hopper. This mechanical tester can be mounted anywhere because the math is 100% built into the measuring device and independent from the mounting system. Share on X

The Vertec was introduced in the early 1990s. It was the most popular mechanical tester and was the Gold Standard until 2023. The NBA Combine used a Vertec through 2023. The Vertec has no electronic component. It has plastic indicators above the athlete that are used for measuring the vertical jump height, which is manually calculated. The measuring device is raised and lowered into position by the operator.

Pros:
• Prior to 2023, the Vertec was the most accurate vertical jump measuring device on the market.
• Delivers good repeatability and reproducible measurements.
• Can be used to measure all types of jumps (Sargent, one-step, or running max jump).
• Baseline for all other vert testers to be compared against.
• Very difficult to cheat—only by not reaching up as high as possible during the standing reach baseline measurement.
• It has been proven that athletes jump higher when a visual target is provided.
• Cost competitive.

Cons:

• Durability issues.
• Math is difficult.
• Telescopic design results in accuracy issues—the pole bends the higher it is raised.
• Some models require counterweight to be added to prevent them from falling over.
• All adjustments were made at chest height, exposing the measuring device to damage when not in use.
• Versatility and portability.
• Can only measure up to 144 inches from the ground.

Why Mechanical Testers Are the #1 Choice for Measuring Vertical Jump Height

It’s pretty simple to understand why mechanical testers are the most popular. If you want to accurately measure vertical jump heights, then you must use a mechanical tester. Mechanical vert testers have no limitation on what types of jumps you can measure, and studies show that athletes jump higher when they have visual targets.

Also, mechanical testers are very hard to “cheat.” The only way for an athlete to cheat the tester is to not reach as high as they can when capturing the standing reach height. This is why almost all sports combines use mechanical testers. They are very simple pieces of equipment that everyone uses correctly, which allows for repeatable and reproducible measurements.

Mechanical vert testers have no limitation on what types of jumps you can measure, and studies show that athletes jump higher when they have visual targets, says Scott Mervis. Share on X

Electronic measuring devices are very accurate when the procedure and the athlete’s jump is highly controlled. Unfortunately, in the real world, athletes can easily cheat the calculation by doing several things during the jump process to delay landing on the mat or force plates. Mechanical testers are also limited to measuring only a stationary jump.

Everything You Need to Know About the Vertec

Manufactured and sold by Sports Imports, Vertec has been the “standard” vertical jump tester for over 30 years. It is the benchmark that every other vert tester is compared against.

There are two Vertec systems available:

• A floor stand system.
• A wall mounted system.

The most common is the floor stand system. It measures in half-inch increments across a range of 72 inches to 144 inches from the ground. The measuring device is attached to square tubing that telescopes. This telescopic tube has etched markings on it that are measurements from the ground. The operator will tighten a screw at the etched line to hold it in place. The athlete will jump and hit thin plastic vanes, which identify the peak of the jump. The base of the floor stand is painted red. The inside telescopic square tube is bare steel.

Manufactured and sold by Sports Imports, Vertec has been the 'standard' vertical jump tester for over 30 years. It is the benchmark that every other vert tester is compared against. Share on X

Here are some of the complaints I heard from thousands of trainers and strength and conditioning coaches.

• Determining the height of an athlete’s vertical jump is a difficult process.
• The math is confusing.
• It breaks easily.
• It takes up a lot of space.
• It is time consuming for a large group.
• It leans the higher it is raised.
• It only comes in red.

Birth of The Top Hopper

In 2016, I decided to make the best vertical jump measuring device—after six years of designing, testing, and making improvements, The Top Hopper vertical jump measuring system was launched. All of the complaints that coaches had about the Vertec were targeted and eliminated.

Today, The Top Hopper vertical jump measuring systems are industrial grade and the most accurate vert tester on the market. The process for measuring an athlete’s jump height is quick and easy. There are four powder-coated steel mounting systems that do not telescope:

1. Traditional floor stand
2. Wall mount
3. Basketball rim mount
4. Extender mount

All four are stocked in four colors with the option for custom colors. There is a TH500 measuring device that measures in ½” increments and a TH1000 that measures in 1” increments. Both are stocked in six color combinations along with an option for custom colors.

Comparing the Top Two Mechanical Vertical Jump Measuring Systems

As more trainers and coaches become aware of The Top Hopper, its popularity continues to grow. The most common comment I get? “Where have you been the past 30 years?”

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

Imagine hoisting a 16-pound bowling ball to your shoulders and, with one arm, heaving it 77 feet, 2 inches. Then attach a 3-foot, 2-inch wire to it, swing it around a few times, and heave it 284 feet. Now take a dinner serving plate that weighs 4.4 pounds and toss it 243 feet. Those numbers represent the men’s world records in the shot put, hammer throw, and discus—that’s power!

As a weightlifter and weightlifting coach, I’ve always been interested in throwers because they often perform weightlifting movements, and a few go on to become elite weightlifters. I lived in Northern California in the 1970s and early 80s, and among the most remarkable dual-sport power athletes here were Ken Patera, Bruce Wilhelm, and Al Feuerbach.

Patera and Wilhelm trained at the Sports Palace Gym in San Francisco under Coach Jim Schmitz. Schmitz, my first and only coach, was a three-time Olympic Games coach and had a knack for getting the most out of big men. Patera placed sixth in the shot put in the 1968 Olympic Trials and had a best of 64-7 (19.7m) when the world record was 69-2 (21m).

As a weightlifter and weightlifting coach, I’ve always been interested in throwers because they often perform weightlifting movements, and a few go on to become elite weightlifters, says Kim Goss. Share on X

Patera moved on from track to compete in the 1972 Olympics in weightlifting, was the first American to clean and jerk 500 pounds, and was the only American to Olympic press 500 pounds. Although Russia’s Vasily Alexeev was the first to clean and jerk 500 pounds in 1970, six months before that historic lift, Patera cleaned 500 but missed the jerk when the platform collapsed.

Wilhelm placed fifth in the shot put in the 1972 Olympic Trials, fifth in weightlifting in the 1976 Olympics, and became the first American to snatch 400 pounds. Wilhelm’s best official shot put was 66-1.4 (20.12m), and he unofficially hit 68-9 (21m).

Feuerbach trained at the San Jose YMCA in San Jose, California, where I worked as a Nautilus instructor (yeah, I know). A three-time Olympian (counting the boycotted 1980 Games), Feuerbach established a world record shot put of 71-7 (21.82m). He made this historic mark on May 5, 1973, during the San Jose Invitational at San Jose State College. Five weeks later, Feuerbach placed second in the Senior National Weightlifting Championships in the 242-pound bodyweight class. He won the meet the following year, snatching 341 pounds and clean and jerking 418.

There were many other elite throwers in Northern California who could have excelled in weightlifting competitions. For example, I often trained at the Iron Works Gym in San Jose, where I saw Olympians Mac Wilkins and Brian Oldfield train. Wilkins was the 1976 Olympic champion and broke the official world record in the discus four times. Oldfield put the shot a world record of 75 feet (22.86m) as a professional. Wilkins and Oldfield were physically impressive and as strong as they looked.

In one workout, I saw Wilkins easily snatch 308 pounds (I heard his best was 330), and the May 1973 issue of Strength and Health magazine has an early photo of Oldfield clean and jerking 350 pounds in competition. I asked Oldfield what he thought the best lift was for the shot put. His answer was the Olympic press, which was dropped from weightlifting competitions after the 1972 Olympics. Oldfield practiced what he preached and became exceptionally powerful in overhead movements—he reportedly could push press over 400 pounds.

Having watched several elite throwers train and coached a few who competed at the collegiate and post-collegiate levels over the past four decades, I’d like to share six key points I’ve discovered.

1. Mass vs. Class

Except for a few phenoms, such as Feuerbach, who stood 6-1, elite throwers tend to be exceptionally tall. Consider the heights of the 2024 gold medal winners in the Olympics:

If there is an exception to the “taller is better” rule, it would be the hammer throw. The current world record in this event is held by two-time Olympic Champion Yuriy Sedykh, who threw 284-6 3/4 (86.74m) in 1986. He stands 6-1. The US record is held by three-time Olympian Rudy Winkler at 271-4 (82.71m). Winkler is 6-2. On the women’s side, Anita Wlodarczyk of Poland holds the world record at 272-2 3/4 (82.98m). Wlodarczyzk is a three-time Olympic gold medalist and is considered the greatest female hammer thrower ever. She is 5-9.

While this discussion primarily focuses on male throwers, I would like to share my thoughts on training female throwers.

2. The Fabulous Females

My weightlifting background enabled me to coach several remarkable female throwers in the 80s and 90s. What I want you to consider is that a large increase in body mass may not be necessary to achieve optimal performance, at least for female throwers.

My weightlifting background enabled me to coach several remarkable female throwers. I want you to consider that a large increase in body mass may not be necessary to optimal performance, at least for female throwers, says Kim Goss. Share on X

Okay, storytime—after serving a four-year Air Force tour (1978-82), I returned to Northern California to finish my undergraduate degree at California State University, Hayward. While there, I enrolled in Dr. Don Chu’s weight training class. Dr. Chu is best known for his work in plyometrics, but his resume as a jump coach includes 45 All-Americans and 17 national champions. As a result, his PE class attracted several high-level track and field athletes. One was Glenda Ford, a discus thrower and shot putter.

Ford was already an exceptional powerlifter, having done a 358-pound squat in competition (credit to Gary Hunnicutt for coaching her in this lift). Thanks to her coach, Dr. Harmon Brown, she also had exceptional throwing technique. When I met her, Ford had set an NCAA Division II record with a winning throw of 162-1 (49.4m) at the 1983 national championships. At this time, I introduced Ford to the full lifts.

Ford improved to 181-7 (55.2m) the following year, which is especially impressive considering her relatively light bodyweight. “She was the best discus thrower in the country for her size,” says Brown. Ford was also, pound-for-pound, an excellent weightlifter.

Ford competed in the 148-pound bodyweight class and broke an unofficial world record in the snatch at the 1985 Senior National Weightlifting Championships. She also placed fourth in the World Weightlifting Championships.

Another powerful athlete I coached, but only after she retired from throwing, was Lindsey Spencer. She had represented Utah State, and her PRs include 178-9 (54.48m) in the discus, 203-4 (61.99m) in the hammer, and 48-11.75 (14.93m) in the shot put. About ten years ago, Spencer moved to Rhode Island to work with me on the Olympic lifts (see video 1).

Spencer’s athleticism and explosiveness remind us that throwers are athletes, and this athleticism transfers to the lifting platform. After just four months of training, she officially broke the New England record in the clean and jerk, lifting 223 pounds in the clean and jerk at the 2014 Arnold Championships. From there, Spencer competed at an elite level in raw powerlifting (squat 419.9 pounds, bench 248, deadlift 440.9 at a bodyweight of 185 pounds) and went to battle in the octagon in MMA.

Video 1. Lindsey Spencer was an elite college thrower who went on to compete at a high level in weightlifting, powerlifting, and MMA.

At a world-class level, I want to mention two more female throwers: Carol Cady and Suzy Powell-Roos. Both broke American records in the discus and used weightlifting as their primary method of strength training.

Cady broke the American record in the discus with 216-8 (66.1m) and unofficial American records in the hammer throw (as it was not an official event at the time). Cady then broke all the American weightlifting records in the 181-pound bodyweight class and competed in the World Weightlifting Championships.

As for Suzy Powell-Roos, I did a feature on her for the Summer 2000 issue of BFS magazine when she was pursuing Cady’s American record. Her strength coach at the time was John McBride of the University of the Pacific.

“He [McBride] gave me my first real introduction to weightlifting,” says Powell-Roos. “He showed me how to do cleans and snatches.” The result? Powell-Roos competed in the 1996, 2000, and 2008 Olympics. In 2007, she threw 222 (67.67m) to break Cady’s long-standing record, and in 2007 hit 227-82 (69.44m). She competed at a bodyweight of 174 pounds.

All these athletes mentioned so far, both male and female, were relatively lean. Could they have thrown farther if they had increased their bodyweight, even if the additional mass was not muscle?

Except for a few phenoms, such as Feuerbach, who stood 6-1, elite throwers tend to be exceptionally tall. If there is an exception to the ‘taller is better’ rule, it would be the hammer throw, says Kim Goss. Share on X

3. You Can’t Flex Fat

In the 1970s, I trained and worked at Bob’s Health Club in Fremont, California (being paid with tubs of protein powder—seriously). I saw the owner, Bob Perata, take a member’s arm measurements with his arm held straight down, which I thought was odd. When I asked my boss why he didn’t have the member flex his biceps to take the measurement, he repeated a motto Arnold Schwarzenegger made popular, “Because you can’t flex fat!” Likewise, throwers must question the value of adding fat mass for the sake of adding fat mass.

Although the data from this study on high-level throwers is from the 70s and 80s, it’s interesting that the researchers concluded, “On average, male throwers had a body fat of 15.9 percent, while females had a percent body fat of 25.4 percent.” These numbers are far below the averages of most Americans, not that the average bodyfat levels of most Americans are optimal. That said, being healthy is one thing, and achieving peak performance is another.

I haven’t found any studies on how adding fat mass directly affects throwing performance. However, we can infer some conclusions from observing weightlifters who move up bodyweight classes and become less efficient. In the following example, I selected weightlifters over powerlifters beyond just having a single set of standardized rules for competition. Let me explain.

Yes, powerlifters are strong, with 1,000-pound squats and deadlifts becoming commonplace. However, speed is a component of the power equation. In powerlifting (PL), power output decreases significantly with heavier weights because movement speed decreases. “Thus, there is an inverse relationship between power output and performance in competitive PL,” says biomechanics researcher Dr. John Garhammer. Let me share a real-world example of why weightlifting is better than powerlifting, at least at the higher performance levels.

I met Grace Apiafi from Nigeria in Colorado Springs in 1987. She had put the shot 43-4 (13.24m) in the 1979 African Championships and then retired. About six months before the 1988 Olympics, Apiafi told me she wanted to make the Olympic team. Besides being detrained from a strength training perspective, her primary fitness training for the previous three years was teaching aerobic dance to school children. Further, in her competitive days, the power lifts were her primary method of strength training.

After such a long layoff and having a few months to get her ready for her Olympic Trials, it would be difficult to get Apiafi’s strength back to her previous levels in the powerlifts. Instead, I had her focus on weightlifting, and she even competed in a weightlifting meet we held at the Air Force Academy. Apiafi not only made the Olympic team but also set a personal record in the shot at 49-4 (15.06m), a six-foot improvement. Success leaves clues.

Getting back to my bodyfat example, consider that in 1984, Russia’s Anatoly Pisarenko clean and jerked 584.2 pounds, an absolute world record. In 2021, Georgia’s Lasha Talakhadze clean and jerked 588.6 pounds, the current world record. Crunching the numbers, it took 37 years to increase the record by 4.4 pounds. A victory is a victory, but at what cost?

Pisarenko’s bodyweight was about 271 pounds. Talakhadze has weighed as much as 403 pounds, a difference of 132 pounds. Was that much additional bodyweight, much of it in the form of fat, necessary for Talakhadze to lift the all-time record—or are we looking at a dramatic case of diminishing returns?

Based on a paper he published in 2002, Russian sports scientist Igor Abramovsky would say Talakhadze’s additional fat mass may have been unnecessary “because the weightlifter has to lift this excess weight during the execution of the weightlifting exercises; second, the sportsman’s speed deteriorates.” Further, in a 1985 medical symposium, researchers estimated that a bodyweight over 308 pounds results in a point of diminishing returns for a weightlifter. There is also the issue of the added mass adversely affecting lifting technique.

According to weightlifting sports scientist Bud Charniga, “The combined girth of the belly and thighs of the biggest athletes conspire to force the athlete to fix the weight higher, i.e., creating a less stable center of mass of athlete – barbell unit.” Expanding on Charniga’s statement, more weight can be lifted to a lower height, so having to catch the barbell in a higher position reduces how much a weightlifter can lift. Excessive fat mass is especially problematic for women.

According to Charniga, compared to male lifters, female lifters “have smaller bones, comparatively less muscle mass and proportionally greater fat mass than their male counterparts. Consequently, with the rise in bodyweight in excess of the now 90 kg (198 pounds) border, females will tend to add more fat mass relative to the increase in muscle mass.”

How can you tell when enough muscle mass and total bodyweight is enough for a shot putter, discus thrower, or hammer thrower? And how should strength training workouts for throwers be designed? I have some ideas.

4. The Switch to Fast Twitch

You will hear bodybuilding writers use terms such as muscle maturity, muscle fullness, muscle density, and muscle hardness—I have no idea what they are talking about. What I do know is that throwers should be most concerned with how their muscles perform, not how they look.

Consider the following conclusion from a 2022 study published in the International Journal of Exercise Science: “Shot put performance depends on the development of maximal force in minimal time.” So, a better question is not how much muscle a thrower needs to pack on their frame, but “Which muscle fibers produce the most powerful muscular contractions?”

There are two basic types of muscle fibers: Type I (slow twitch) and Type II (fast twitch). Type I fibers are less powerful than Type II fibers but have greater endurance. Bodybuilders primarily use submaximal weights and higher repetitions, which develops the Type I fibers more than the Type II. These lower-intensity workouts also increase the development of non-contractile substances and fluid, further increasing overall muscle size. This explains why bodybuilders are strong but seldom as powerful as weightlifters or throwers.

I should mention here that although some throwers used plyometrics to develop fast twitch muscles, they often avoid the more intense forms of these exercises, particularly depth jumps. And as with adding body mass, there is also the matter of diminishing returns.

Anatoliy Bondarchuk won Olympic gold in the hammer throw and has coached many champions, including Yuri Sedykh. Bondarchuk saw significant decreases in the correlation between jumping ability (long jump, triple jump, vertical jump) as hammer throwers increased their results. Although plyometrics may have value for beginners, advanced throwers may not benefit as much. Risk of injury is another issue.

While coaching at Brown University, one of my athletes was Kaela Brenner, a cross-country athlete. Her father was John Brenner, who broke the American record shot put with 73 feet, 10-1/2 inches (22.52m), and won a bronze medal in the 1987 World Championships. Brenner said his training was going well, and he told a Los Angeles Times reporter he expected “to go 74, or 75 feet in a meet.” On a visit to Brown University to visit his daughter, Brenner told me he missed the 1988 Olympics when he attempted a depth jump at the UCLA weight room, tearing his patella tendon on his left knee.

One practical way to determine whether a thrower is on the right track with their training is to test athletes with the Lewis Formula, a power index based on vertical jump and body weight. The vertical jump is the X axis, and the athlete’s bodyweight is the Y. The point where they intersect represents power.

As long as a thrower’s Lewis Formula increases, we can “assume” that the athlete can continue increasing their bodyweight (although, preferably, with lean muscle mass). If their power index is not improving, the athlete and their coaches must find ways to increase their vertical jump or decrease their body mass without losing strength, such as by reducing body fat.

I haven’t found any studies on how adding fat mass directly affects throwing performance. However, we can infer some conclusions from observing weightlifters who move up bodyweight classes and become less efficient, says Kim Goss. Share on X

Of the three types of throwers discussed here, my understanding of the work of Olympic Games hammer throw champion Anatoliy Bondarchuk is that the vertical jump has the highest correlation to the shot put and the lowest correlation to the hammer throw. (For an extensive review of this topic, I highly recommend Bondarchuk’s classic textbook, Transfer of Training in Sports. I would also recommend attending seminars by Derek Woodske, a strength coach I worked with for several years in Rhode Island. Woodske threw the hammer 242-09 (73.79m) and has an extensive understanding of Bondarchuk’s work.)

I’ve also talked to track and field coaches who found that some of their throwers could vertical jump higher than their high jumpers (due to the type of stretch-shortening cycles that occur in the two sports). Just how high can shot putters jump? Here are a few impressive examples:

By the way, Nelson claims to have push jerked 440 for two reps. I recall early work by biomechanics researcher Dr. John Garhammer, who said the power outputs of the push jerk were as high as the highest power outputs of the clean. Perhaps Nelson’s emphasis on this lift contributed to his remarkable jumping ability.

Besides developing a foundation of strength with the powerlifts and explosiveness with weightlifting movements, throwers often perform specific exercises that improve rotational power. Before addressing this issue, it would be wise to consider what’s going on with the feet.

5. Foundations of Power

A house needs to be built on a solid foundation, and likewise, a thrower must have a stable foundation from which to produce rotational force. Let’s begin with some definitions.

“Valgus and varus feet are conditions where the ankle bones do not rest directly above the foot,” says Posturologist and Strength Coach Paul Gagné. He says a valgus foot is characterized by the foot collapsing inward (pronation), causing the ankle bones to rotate internally. There are three levels of the valgus foot, with level three fulfilling the definition of flat feet.

A varus foot, in contrast, causes the foot to collapse outward (supination), causing the ankle bones to rotate externally. “Excessive valgus and varus feet increase the stress on the ligaments of the ankle, knees, and lower back,” says Gagné. “Regardless of how many stretches and corrective strength exercises you do, they will have little effect on improving posture if your feet are not structurally sound.”

Another important foot condition is disharmonic feet, where one foot is valgus and the other is varus (Image 6). “Disharmonic feet shift the pelvis, increasing the shearing force on the spine,” says Gagné. “As it relates to throwing, an athlete with disharmonic feet will carry more weight on one leg, and this shift in balance will affect their ability to generate force in a rotational direction.”

Although beyond the scope of this article, Gagné says that valgus, varus, and disharmonic feet can be improved with special eye exercises and corrective exercises that reform the foot arch. He says the extensor hallucis longus and the flexor hallucis longus are among the most important muscles to strengthen. Image 6 shows an exercise Gagné prescribes to athletes that aligns the knee with the big toe and creates lateral tension on the feet to lift the arch and help correct valgus feet.

Two elite throwers who benefited from corrective exercises are Adam Nelson and four-time Olympian Jud Logan, a hammer thrower. Both athletes worked with Canadian strength coach Charles R. Poliquin.

When I interviewed Nelson in 2004 for BFS magazine, he said Poliquin corrected muscle imbalances that contributed to his shoulder problems, whereas Poliquin wrote that he was able to resolve Logan’s chronic knee pain by correcting muscle imbalances in his quadriceps muscles.

6. Twist and Shout

In contrast to general exercises that develop overall strength or power, such as the squat and the snatch, there are special exercises that overload the muscles in movement patterns similar to those produced in the sport. However, we must be careful about our terminology.

Many strength coaches say that sports-specific training does not exist. Yes and no. Duplicating a technical movement in a sport exactly with resistance may do more harm than good by affecting the timing of the sporting movement. Examples include throwing a weighted football (which can be pretty harsh on the shoulders) or swinging a weighted tennis racket.

A house needs to be built on a solid foundation, and likewise, a thrower must have a stable foundation from which to produce rotational force. Let’s begin with some definitions, says Kim Goss. Share on X

A better approach is to practice movements similar to an athlete’s movements in sports but not exactly specific. The popular term for these exercises is “special strength” training. Pushing or pulling a sled could be considered special strength training for a sprinter. Dr. Yuri Verkoshansky, a Russian jump coach, and his Russian colleague Bondarchuk have written extensively about special strength training. Bondarchuk, for example, looked at the correlation between the squat and throwing ability of elite hammer throwers.

Bondarchuk found that the “correlation coefficient” between the squat and hammer throw decreased as athletes achieved higher levels of throwing ability. For the 60-65m throwers, the squat correlation was .437 but decreased to .196 for athletes throwing 75-80m. In contrast, the 10-kilo hammer correlation went from .542 for the 60-65m throwers to .824 for the 75-80m throwers. The takeaway is that after developing a foundation of power with weightlifting movements, throwers often add “special strength” exercises that strengthen rotational strength and power.

When determining which special strength exercises to perform, consider the anatomy of the oblique abdominal muscles. These muscles are called oblique because of their position relative to the spine; they are oblique to the spine. Further, most oblique fibers are arranged and positioned diagonally rather than transversely (perpendicular) to the spine (Image 7). According to Gagné, this diagonal alignment makes the obliques ineffective in producing force horizontally.

“The gastrocnemius has fibers arranged longitudinally,” says Gagné. “You would not work the calves by pulling your legs across your body, rather, use an exercise such as a standing calf raise to apply resistance longitudinally. Likewise, you should not train your obliques by rotating your spine horizontally on a single axis, such as with the torso machines you find in many commercial gyms. This horizontal movement is not natural and creates large shearing forces on the spine, particularly when seated.”

Image 7. The oblique muscles run diagonally rather than transversely (perpendicular) to the spine (Image via Wikipedia Commons. Source. Creative Commons License here).

“Because the oblique fibers are aligned diagonally to the spine, they are best suited to produce positive and negative torsion,” says Gagné. “Negative torsion is rotation coupled with extension, such as when a thrower releases the discus. Positive torsion is rotation coupled with flexion, such as when a golfer brings their club down to hit the ball.” Image 8 shows two woodchop exercises performed with a cable machine that creates positive and negative torsion.

There are many ways to produce special rotational strength, including cables, flywheel devices, medicine balls, and kettlebells (as the handles allow for easy release). John Powell supplemented his discus training by throwing the hammer, which could be considered a form of special strength training. (Fun Fact: Powell’s strength coach was Richard Marks, a shot putter with a best of 62-27 (18.98m). I saw Marks snatch 363 pounds in a local meet in 1976 when the American record was about 380.)

When it comes to program design, counter-rotation must be considered. Neuroscientist J. P. Roll found that strengthening one side of the body will neurologically “code” the strength training effect of the other side. Further, the ability to produce rotation in one direction is influenced by how well that individual can produce rotation in the opposite direction.

“In working with professional golfers, we found we can increase the ability of a right-handed golfer to generate club speed by having them work with a left-handed club,” notes Gagné. I’ve also heard about one former world record holder in the javelin, Tom Petranoff, who occasionally threw with the opposite arm to prevent injuries.

Besides special strength exercises, Gagné says the overhead squat is an excellent exercise for developing rotation because it involves considerable counter-rotation to maintain proper alignment. Further, the exercise can determine if an imbalance is present. Canadian strength coach Charles Poliquin often used the overhead squat to assess his athletes and taught it in seminars. The assessment was also used in a corrective exercise class I took while working on my master’s degree at A.T. Still University.

There are many variables associated with achieving the highest results in throwers. Yes, elite shot putters, hammer throwers, and discus throwers tend to be significantly taller and larger than other track and field athletes, but much bigger is not always much better. Also, rather than training harder, the focus should be on training smarter with dynamic exercises that develop explosiveness and special strength exercises that target the muscles that produce rotation. It’s a question of balance.

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

Davis, Dave. “Move Over World…Here Comes Brian Oldfield.” Strength and Health. May 1973.

Glenda Ford, Pioneer Athletics Hall of Fame.

Goss, Kim. “Suzy Powell: A Date with Destiny.” BFS magazine. Summer 2000.

Dangel, Donald R; Dengel, Olivia H. “Body Composition—Methods and Importance for Performance and Health.” Techniques Magazine. Reprinted July 7, 2016, in coachesinsider.com.

Garhammer, John. “A Review of Power Output Studies of Olympic and Powerlifting: Methodology, Performance Predication, and Evaluation Tests. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 1993, 7(2): 76-89.

Charniga, Andrew, Jr. “Scaling of Body Mass in Weightlifting: What Can Happen to the World’s Strongest Weightlifters.” Sportivnypress.com. June 18, 2018.

Abramovsky, Igor. “A Weightlifter’s Excess Bodyweight and Sport Results.” Sportivnypress.com, Bud Charniga Translation: May 2, 2014 (Originally published in 2002).

Meranzov, C; Spasov, Sinclair; et al. “Trends in the evolution of sports results during the 1973 -1983 period,” IWF Coaching – Refereeing – Medical Symposium, Bad Blakenburg (GDR). May 28 – 30:1985:29-34.

Caughey, RM, and Thomas C. “Variables Associated with High School Shot Put Performance.” International Journal of Exercise Science. October 1, 2022: 15(6):1357-1365.

Nuckols, Greg. “Sarcoplasmic Hypertropy: The Bros Were Probably Right.” Stronger by Science. ND

Scottish Athletics. “Lessons From Bondarchuk.” HMMR Media. September 2017.

Florence, Mal. “Brenner to Miss Olympics Again After Tearing Tendon.” Los Angeles Times, June 21, 1988.

Bondarchuk, Anatoliy P. Transfer of Training in Sports. Ultimate Athlete Concepts. 2007: 97-125.

Gagné, Paul, Personal Conversation, September 6, 2024.

Goss, Kim. “Adam Nelson, The Giant Killer.” BFS magazine. Summer 2004.

“Javelin Throwers Weak Side Training Logic.” Javelin Throw Magazine.

Chapman J, Henneberg M. “Switching the handedness of adults: Results of 10 weeks training of the non-preferred hand.” Perspectives in Human Biology. 1999; 4 (1), 211–217.

The following is an expanded article that contains both new ideas as well as fragments originally appearing in a prior article by Jesse McMeekin. This is why you may hear me reference a concept, perspective, model, or quote using the words, “I,” “me,” “my,” and similar terminology.

Those of you familiar with my model have no doubt heard me theorize that the single biggest driving factor in the sports injury epidemic is one and the same as that for society’s declining health—both ultimately symptomatic of modernity. In other words, the modern maladaptive environment turns us into something like a slow burn version of fish outside the tank. Only, instead of flopping around for a bit before it’s curtains, we undergo a slower, more drawn-out process by which degeneration slowly but surely takes root and manifests in various ways.

This is the core theoretical model I explored in my book—Adaptive Nutrition—before pivoting into the applied side. Specifically, how one can improve their health and performance through creating a more nourishing, generative lifestyle within the context of the modern world. The end goal being to not just survive—but to thrive.

This sets the stage for what’s known as the Jacksonian Dissolution—named after its creator, John Hughlings Jackson, and introduced to us by Dr. Pat Davidson. The idea is more fully elucidated in a distilled form in The Polyvagal Theory. This concept isn’t the whole show, but is a fundamental component of my structure-function-energetics model of health and performance.

In essence, the core concept states that as a system or organism evolves, it becomes at once more flexible, more complex, and—due to this complexity—more fragile. When exposed to stress, the usually complex and flexible system devolves to simpler states, sacrificing complexity for survival.
The core concept states that as a system or organism evolves, it becomes at once more flexible, more complex, and—due to this complexity—more fragile, says @rewirehp. Share on X

How Does This Show Up In Health and Performance?

At some level, this is less complex than it sounds and you’ve no doubt seen it in action. A great example is that under fatigue, movement gets sloppier. There are, however, more telltale signs and interplay with other biological systems working under the athlete’s hood, and various ways in which this can then manifest. By better understanding these concepts, you’ll be able to have a more organized and structured framework from which to assess and address stress with your athletes.

In application, what the theory is really describing is how complex systems, such as biological organisms, respond to stress and adversity. In the context of training or sport performance, it suggests that as a system (e.g., the body on the whole, a motor output, or a specific physiological pathway) becomes more complex and flexible, it also becomes more fragile and prone to break down under stress.

We as coaches should do what we can in order to understand environmental stress that cumulatively piles on as allostatic overload, says @rewirehp. Share on X
If you don’t read anything beyond this point, here’s the key takeaway: we as coaches should do what we can in order to understand environmental stress that cumulatively piles on as allostatic overload. From here, we pull whatever levers we can from the perspectives of program design and load management while also educating athletes on ideal lifestyle inputs that can help them minimize the stress of playing, training, traveling, life, and more.

Stress-Reduced Regression in Action

Stress-reduced regression refers to the idea that—as stress accumulates—the system devolves to simpler, more primitive states, sacrificing complexity for survival. This is evident in examples such as:

• Energy Systems: As the body’s three primary energy systems (alactic, lactic, and aerobic) evolved, they became increasingly complex—the electron transport chain and the Krebs cycle—and increasingly flexible in their use of substrates as fuel, and increasingly susceptible to being derailed by environmental factors.

If you subject a resting body to sufficient stress, it will shift its energy production from predominantly aerobic to more anaerobic (lactic). And if the stress is of sufficient intensity, the body shifts all the way back down to the prehistoric alactic system. Surely one can picture the energy systems of an athlete subjected to acute (or chronic) stress downgrading, limiting performance, and potentially opening them up to injury.

• Planes of Motion and Movement Patterns: When it comes to planes of motion, the sagittal plane is the foundation for the frontal plane. The transverse plane is built from and upon both the sagittal and frontal planes. With limited stress, we move freely through all three. But we regress as stress accumulates; normally smooth, fluid gait patterns becoming the staggering waddle of a drunk (or someone after leg day) as we lose control of all but the simplest expressions of movement—flexion and extension.

In “Rethinking the Big Patterns,” Dr. Pat Davidson cites how devolutions in human posture and movement closely mimic our closest ape ancestors (for helpful background context). A quite literal trip down the evolutionary ladder. In essence, as stress accumulates, the body may regress from complex, fluid movements to simpler, more primitive patterns. This is exemplified in the example of a person’s static posture or gait pattern changing from smooth and aligned to projected forward or stumbling under fatigue.

• Henneman’s Size Principle: This states that motor units are recruited in order, from smallest to largest. The upshot is that the first muscle fibers called upon are the low-force, high-endurance, slow-twitch fibers (type I). The body’s-high force, low-endurance fibers (type II) aren’t recruited unless either increased force or power is required (heavy weight or fast movement)—or as fatigue of the type I fibers sets in. Among the practical benefits of the body’s strategy is the ability to limit fatigue by relying on mitochondria-rich type I muscle fibers.

Examined through the lens of Jacksonian Dissolution, we see a tendency for stress to break down yet another system with concurrent costs and benefits shifting in order to complete a given task. Heavy weight (high stress) reduces us to a more basic, more durable, but less efficient state.

• Motor Control: The higher the level of systemic stress, the greater the loss of motor control abilities. This can happen in both an acute setting (e.g., an NBA player changing time zones, disturbing sleep rhythms) as well as in a chronic capacity (e.g., energetic mismatches from high demands of sport and life relative to energetic intake from diet and environment). We’ve all experienced moments where our nervous system is shot and unable to manage the intricacies of more complex, coordinated, demanding movement tasks under the stress of fatigue.

We’ve all experienced moments where our nervous system is shot and unable to manage the intricacies of more complex, coordinated, demanding movement tasks under the stress of fatigue, says @rewirehp. Share on X

• Cognitive Abilities and Emotional Regulation: Yes, J.D. can also manifest itself in both how we take in—and show up in—the world. Neuroscientist David Eagleman likes to say “our reality depends on what our biology is up to.” That’s a pretty solid way to describe this phenomenon. This is also a particularly helpful area as it can tip off trainers and health practitioners to potential chronic or acute disruptions in physiology that may first be more obvious in how someone presents. Similarly, cognitive functions can exhibit Jacksonian Dissolution. Under stress or fatigue, individuals may revert to more primitive, automatic responses, such as swearing out of frustration or emotional outbursts, as their normally refined language processing abilities are overwhelmed. The same can be said of information gathering abilities.

The Stress Response: Implications for Training, Load Management, and Program Design

Stress management is the first implication to keep in mind. Recognize that training is a stress-management process. Aim to apply stress in a targeted, controlled manner to drive desired adaptations. McMeekin points out in his initial article on this subject that it can also be helpful to look at individual training sessions as a singular dissolving event. You’re probably looking at wanting to save movement tasks with greater energetic requirements prior to plugging in simpler, more guttural things—such as sled drags—that sap energy and are fairly safe to accomplish in a more fatigued state.

As far as stress on the whole, Coach Kyle Dobbs notes that effective training essentially comes down to stress management. That’s a pretty succinct summary of any intelligent training model, and Jacksonian Dissolution is simply a way of understanding what happens as we apply stress to various bodily systems. The aim of applying stress is to temporarily degrade or dissolve a system; following training you are slower, weaker, and less coordinated than you were beforehand. But stress drives change, and the temporary degradation in abilities ultimately leads to lasting improvement.

Having a foundational understanding of systems biology and the bioregulatory processes that govern health and performance—including the interplay of these systems—is key.

• Consider the interplay between various bodily systems when designing training programs.
• Avoid overwhelming individual systems, as this can lead to devolution and reduced effectiveness.

In addition to acknowledging the performance physiology that supports athletic endeavors, coaches must understand the stress response. By better understanding what’s going on under the hood, we can make more informed coaching and lifestyle decisions. Ultimately, the stress response and all its requisite components—glucagon, epinephrine (adrenaline), norepinephrine, cortisol, growth hormone, etc.—are some of the human body’s most adaptive and beneficial mechanisms. Stress—in the right doses and with adequate recovery—is tremendously good for us! And Jacksonian Dissolution can serve as a window into our stress response.

Stress—in the right doses and with adequate recovery—is tremendously good for us! And Jacksonian Dissolution can serve as a window into our stress response, says @rewirehp. Share on X

There are also implications for basic concepts we’re all familiar with as coaches, like progressive overload. Gradually increase stress (load) to allow for adaptation and avoid sudden, catastrophic failures. Meet athletes where they’re at, in other words.

Additionally, generalized stress isn‘t enough for an efficient training stimulus. Stress should be a sniper rifle, not a shotgun, and a workout that leaves you panting and nauseated may or may not be driving the change you’re looking for. Jacksonian Dissolution looks at individual systems, not entire organisms. While there’s sure to be some overlap, say, between muscular fatigue, energy system recruitment, and elements of how we present in life (e.g., language use and processing), it’s important not to seek stress for its own sake. Wham, bam, beat-em-up training could have its place, but seeking difficulty for difficulty’s sake is not the move.

Recovery is another quality with implications we can take from Jacksonian Dissolution. Ensure adequate recovery time as well as positive environmental inputs in the form of diet, sleep, light diet, and beyond in order to allow for rebuilding and refinement of complex (and other) systems.

Applied: 5 Interventions Coaches Can Use to Manage Allostatic Load

1. Educate clients on the importance of sleep

This should more or less go without saying, but educating athletes so they can dial in their sleep hygiene may be the most effective stress management lever we can pull. Research shows that injury potential increases by as much as 70% following disruptions in sleep quality.

Rather than obsessing over wearable metrics, the focus should be on getting clients more in tune with how they feel and teaching them to listen to their bodies by checking in with themselves more effectively. Aiming for 8.5 hours of sleep (but at least over 7) is good practice for most. Exposure to natural light during the day, morning, and evening likely helps tune our circadian biology, as well. Reduction strategies for blue light can be effective here, too. A nutrition intervention specific to sleep would be glucose in the evening before bed (e.g., milk and honey) as insulin opposes stress hormones like cortisol in the system—effectively helping athletes silence the stress response and prime their nervous system before rest and restoration.

2. Be flexible by keeping a regulatory or adaptive program design model to meet athletes where they’re at physically

Just because something is written down on paper, doesn’t mean we have to do it. Plan A should be flexible if athletes are in an acute or chronically fatigued state. Omegawave’s Windows of Trainability and athlete readiness concepts are useful to keep in mind here.

3. Consider educating athletes on mindfulness installations

Living a more balanced life in general—meditation, mindfulness strategies, time spent doing nothing, time outdoors, and more—are all potential inputs that can improve our responses to stress. Mike Franco—a mental skills coach in the NBA—is a great example who shows how integrating mindfulness into sports can be done successfully.

4. Don’t neglect nutrition

Diet is another one of the giant levers here. Injuries and degradations in performance often occur because of an energetic mismatch between an athlete’s outputs and their environment. In addition to the other inputs like sleep, we should be educating athletes to improve their energetic state through diet so they can “bite off” more of the stress that training, playing, and life have to offer.

The obvious first boxes to check would be mitigating junk food and unwanted ingredients while also ensuring there’s not a big caloric or macro deficiency. I give more targeted recommendations in the book, but in general we want to stay away from diet dogmas that may actually plunge athletes into more of a survival state (e.g., extreme diets like plant-based, low-carb, carnivore, keto, chronic fasting). Instead, the goal should be to select foods that are high in energy yield relative to energy lost from digestive obligations and from managing inflammation. This can simplify the process of how to build one’s base of food substantially.

5. Inspect what you expect; have informed tests you use with athletes if it’s feasible

Paying attention to clients and meeting them where they’re at is the most important measure here. That said, looking at deteriorating output-based metrics can also be incredibly helpful. Whether it’s reflex tests, tap tests, or something more quantitative like CMJs (we use Hawkin Dynamics force plates for this), numbers in the gym may all be useful here.

If one has the ability, use temperature and pulse rate (with disturbances in both over a multi-day period potentially serving as a canary in the coalmine for systemic stress) as a “check engine light” for metabolic stress/state.

There are other useful measurements here, such as integrating quality stress measurement devices, like Omegawave, and well-done HRV.

Paying attention to clients and meeting them where they’re at is the most important measure here. That said, looking at deteriorating output-based metrics can also be incredibly helpful, says @rewirehp. Share on X

Parting Shots

If we accept that training is at some level stress management, Jacksonian Dissolution is at once a measure of the stress being applied, a way to understand the effect(s) of that stress upon a given system, and a framework for how to apply that stress in a safe, effective manner.

As a measure of stress: I’ll be as clear as I can be—and will close with the same thought for good measure—effective training should be terrifyingly hard at points. I want people reduced to their baser selves, far removed from the niceties of our sedentary society. And it’s a rare person who will go there voluntarily, who signs up for what at times amounts to near-torture. In these moments, part of my role is to ensure that things are as hard as they need to be, and Jacksonian Dissolution offers a fairly robust way to examine your response to stress. Your posture, body language, the way you breathe, word choice, movement quality, the length of your sentences… all of it is a source of feedback, and I need to see at least some of it deteriorate.

Your posture, body language, the way you breathe, word choice, movement quality, the length of your sentences… all of it is a source of feedback, and I need to see at least some of it deteriorate, says @rewirehp. Share on X

Training can’t stay pretty all the time.

Having hopefully argued convincingly in favor of applying real, meaningful levels of stress via training, it is every bit as important that we consider both the allostatic load—total stress—an individual is under as well as their strategies to manage that stress. Are their nutritional, sleep, and leisure activities conducive to high or low applications of stress? Do they have a social system they can lean on for support, or one that requires support from them at the moment? Don’t shy away from stress, but be aware that we are almost literally playing with fire; we want to toast the marshmallow rather than set it on fire, so to speak.

As a way of understanding the effects of stress: Perhaps the simplest way of understanding a system under stress is via the particular model of Jacksonian Dissolution. Under sufficient stress, a system will revert to simpler, more primitive alternatives.

As a guide for stress application: In designing a training program, coaches should consider what kind of stress is best suited to the person, the movement, and the degree of fatigue they’re experiencing (early vs. late in the workout, for example). Our big, sagittal movements lend themselves nicely to heavy loads and high fatigue. I can deadlift, squat, press, and row through enormous fatigue.

In designing a training program, coaches should consider what kind of stress is best suited to the person, the movement, and the degree of fatigue they're experiencing, says @rewirehp. Share on X

But that becomes a different story for more complex movement tasks. As movements become less stable or more complex, stress needs to be applied in a different way. The nervous system already perceives the body’s position as an elevated source of threat, and heaping on too much additional stress can end badly. In these cases, additional stress—in the form of too much load, too little rest, and the like—can actually detract from the intended training effect by allocating resources to the wrong stressor. Dr. Pat Davidson talks about the need for additional “ground” (external support and neurological references) as an ideal starting place for newcomers as well as those in fatigued states (e.g., an NBA player in-season).

When we introduce speed and power into the mix, things get even dicier as fatigue sets in. Box jumps are a terrific, low-intensity way to develop explosive power, but done as a “finisher” or as part of a circuit—particularly with an athlete jumping back off of the box—the injury risk they pose may not be worth the reward. In addition to the potential for injury, the effect of the stress may again be misplaced. Stress is specific; if the intent is to develop power and explosiveness, the fatigue the body is under will limit the amount of power being expressed and, therefore, developed.

How you fit the puzzle pieces together will vary tremendously—we haven’t even considered the athlete/client, their goals, ability level, and the like—but certain overriding principles can and should guide our choices regardless of who we’re working with. Stress drives adaptation, but stress is system-specific. A hard workout may not be an effective one.

Ultimately, by acknowledging Jacksonian Dissolution in the training environment, coaches and trainers can better understand the dynamic interactions between bodily systems and design more effective, adaptive training programs.

I suppose I’ll leave you with this. We need stress. It shapes us. Both in sport and fitness, as well as growing in life on the whole. And stress is ugly, messy, frightening, and primitive. Stress is savage, and at times you need to meet it head on. Think about how and when you apply stress, but when it’s time to get to work, be a savage.

Jesse McMeekin is a trainer, educator and coach. You can find him at his website www.adapt-performance.com.

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

It’s not uncommon for high school or college coaches to schedule a team conditioning workout around in-season practices or games and find the weight room already overcrowded or in use by another team. Whenever it happens, there’s no reason to walk away and reschedule a session. Make medicine balls your go-to choice for athletes and teams—especially when the weight room is inaccessible. But, they’re also an effective training alternative even when the weight room is available for your team!

Coaches can convince athl­etes that they can derive equal if not greater training benefits by performing sports-relevant multidirectional/multiplanar forward, reverse, lateral, twisting/turning movements, and balance-boosting exercises with medicine balls in the hallway, auxiliary gym, or outdoors. Athletes can do these in place of what they might have done in the weight room that day, such as conventional, one-dimensional standing, seated or supine barbell, dumbbell, or machine exercises.

Using... medicine balls can promote prized sports performance gains like strength, size, power, endurance, and core- strengthening—all in one workout, says Jim Carpentier. Share on X

How? Using light, moderately-heavy, and heavy medicine balls (depending on each athlete’s strength level) can promote prized sports performance gains like, size, power, endurance, and core- strengthening—all in one workout—such as doing compound (multi-joint) and multiplanar combination side lunges and ball twists, or forward lunges and overhead ball presses to simultaneously build upper and lower body size and strength; reducing rest time between sets of different exercises to enhance endurance; and doing single-leg balancing exercises.

Balance is underestimated in sports, yet frequently required during practice and game situations (e.g., keeping feet in bounds when catching a football or passing a basketball to a teammate).

Bonus: Athletes will even have more fun performing the medicine ball exercises when partnering up with their teammates!

Other Med Ball Advantages

• Their portability makes them a convenient conditioning element for workouts outside the weight room, such as school hallways, basketball gyms, or outdoors (as previously mentioned).
• For coaches and athletes scheduling workouts around practices and games, med balls are time efficient (a workout time-saver without spending added time changing weight plates or adjusting resistance with dumbbells, barbells, weight machines, or cables between sets). And with less time spent changing resistance, med balls thereby can enhance endurance going from set to set, or exercise to exercise with minimal rest—simulating the continuous action with brief rest periods in sports like football, hockey, basketball, hockey, tennis, wrestling, and lacrosse.

Med balls’ portability makes them a convenient conditioning element for workouts outside the weight room, such as school hallways, basketball gyms, or outdoors. Share on X

The Only Plan-B Workout Equipment Your Athletes Will Need

Have your athletes bring the right sized balls either into the hallway, to a more spacious area such as the gymnasium, or outdoors when the weather is conducive. The balls are the only equipment needed to perform the following two anywhere, anytime, brief-but-intense 30-minute full-body workouts!

During my years as a high school strength and conditioning coach and YMCA personal and group trainer, medicine balls were my go-to option.

Overall Guidelines

• Ensure the athletes have water bottles and hydrate before, during, and after workouts.
• Have them do a dynamic upper and lower body warm-up (e.g., arm circles/lateral or forward walking lunges).
• Finish with cool-down upper and lower body stretches promoting flexibility.
• Sets/Reps: 1 x 10.
• Rest 30-60 seconds between exercises to enhance size/strength for athletes using heavy balls.
• If the goal is building endurance, use lighter balls with less rest between each exercise (15-30 seconds).
• Have your team perform the med ball workout every other week or every few weeks for a refreshing change from doing standard weight room exercises such as squats, deadlifts, and bench presses—either in-season or during off-season conditioning.

8 Medball Exercises to Include in the Workout

1. Partner Squat and Ball Press-Out. Begin in an athletic stance (knees slightly bent, hips back, feet shoulder-width apart) facing each other about five feet apart. Hold the ball close to the chest. Slowly lower to a squat, pause two seconds, and rapidly rise while explosively pressing the ball out to the teammate. The teammate performs the same technique and throws the ball back to their partner. That’s one rep. Repeat nine more times before each does the next exercise.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: An effective upper and lower body combo muscle-building exercise—especially in sports using pushing movements (e.g., blocking in football, quickly passing a basketball across court, pushing away a hockey opponent to get to the puck, or pushing off a wrestling foe during the match).

2. Single Leg Bent Over Row. Have your athlete hold the ball below their waist with arms extended. Next, lean forward with one knee bent and the opposite foot off the ground. Pull the ball to the waist, pause two seconds, and slowly lower to start position, and continue until 10 reps. Rest and do 10 reps with the other foot off the ground.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: This is an excellent balance-enhancing exercise that also strengthens back, arm, leg and hip muscles while continuously maintaining balancing with one foot off the ground for an extended time before switching with the other foot off the ground. The exercise transcends to a football game—picture a wide receiver pulling in a pass low to the ground, then trying to stay on both feet while trying to escape a tackler whose arms are grabbing the receiver’s leg.

During my years as a high school strength and conditioning coach and YMCA personal and group trainer, medicine balls were my go-to option, says Jim Carpentier. Share on X

3. Foot Elevated Ball Push-Up. Assume a push-up position with both hands grasping the sides of the ball—palms facing each other, arms extended, and one foot airborne. Slowly descend a few inches from the ball, pause, and explosively press back up to the starting position, and repeat nine more times.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: Athletes will find this is a tough exercise requiring core strength and stability, while taxing chest, back, shoulder, and arm muscles. Whether you’re a strength coach or a team coach, always stress the importance of equally building strong core muscles (abdominal, back, groin, hips) besides focusing on upper and lower body strength. Any athlete who falls to the ground wants to quickly push up and become upright as play continues. Example: A baseball or softball outfielder dives to catch the ball and needs to rapidly rise and throw to the infield to prevent a baserunner from tagging up and advancing to the next base.

4. Partner Side Lunge, Ball Twist and Pass. Both athletes should be spaced about five feet laterally apart. Teammate A: Assume an athletic stance while holding the ball with arms extended at chest level and lunge laterally left while simultaneously rotating the body with the ball to the left and passing it to Teammate B. Teammate B then lunges and twists laterally right and passes back to Teammate A. That’s one rep. Continue for nine more reps. Then switch positions as Teammate A now lunges/twists/passes the ball laterally right and Teammate B is now lunging/twisting/passing left—each doing 10 more reps.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: This upper and lower body combo exercise especially targets abdominal muscles and builds core strength with the ball twists—so it’s applicable for sports that require twisting/turning like swinging a bat in baseball or softball, turning around to catch a football or basketball pass, lunging right or left to hit a tennis ball, or a lacrosse player turning and passing the ball sideways to a teammate. The exercise also transcends to sports such as baseball/softball, football, and basketball that require athletes to rotate left or right to toss the ball to a teammate. Examples: A quarterback turning sideways and passing the ball laterally to a running back; a shortstop fielding a groundball, turning, and tossing the ball to the second baseman to force out an advancing runner; a basketball guard lunging right or left, turning and passing the ball to an open teammate for a three-point shot in the corner.

5. Walking Forward Lunge and Ball Raise. Hold the ball at waist level with arms extended. Lunge forward with your right leg and simultaneously raise the ball overhead. Bring the ball down to the start position while still in a lunge position. Lunge forward with your left leg and raise the ball overhead. That’s two reps. Continue for 10 reps, alternating right/left lunges and ball raises.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: Builds leg, hip, arm, and shoulder muscles and mimics a basketball center lunging for a rebound and raising the ball overhead away from an opponent.

6. Partner Ball Rolls From Push-Up Position. Both athletes begin in a push-up position—spaced about two feet laterally apart from each other—with their back straight, core tight, and preventing hips and the lower back from sagging during the exercise. Teammate A: With the right hand atop the ball, left hand on floor, roll it sideways to the right to Teammate B. Teammate B then places left hand on the ball, right hand on the floor, and laterally rolls it back to Teammate A (one rep for each athlete). Continue for 10 reps, switch positions, and Teammate A now rolls the ball with the left hand to Teammate B/Teammate B rolls the ball back with the right hand.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: The exercise thoroughly works core, arm, chest, shoulder, and back muscles and simulates underhand lateral passing the ball motions in sports such as baseball/softball, football, and basketball.

7. Alternating Ball Chop and Squat. From an athletic stance and ball held overhead, drive the ball down and across your body toward the right ankle while lowering into a squat. Rise and bring the ball back overhead; then, quickly bring the ball down toward the left ankle as you’re squatting. That’s one alternating ball chop. Do nine more and rest.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: The core, upper body, and lower body muscles are all engaged during the movement. If you’re a baseball or softball coach, tell players—particularly infielders—that this is a terrific exercise that mimics reaching overhead to catch the ball and quickly bringing the glove down to tag a baserunner.

8. Single Leg Overhead Press. Hold the ball in front at shoulder level, bend the right knee with the left foot off the floor, and press the ball overhead, back to start position, and overhead for 10 reps. Rest; then, switch with the right foot off the floor and press overhead 10 reps.

• Sports-Specific Benefits: While enhancing balance and core stability, this exercise also engages the lower body muscles (leg and hip) when one foot is off the floor, while building arm, chest, and shoulder muscles, and mimics a basketball player balancing on one foot while shooting the ball before the shot clock expires, for example, or a volleyball player off balance and passing the ball overhead to a teammate for a spike.

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

Every Saturday and Sunday you will find dozens of families lined up on grass fields, cheering for kids in brightly colored jerseys. No matter the sport, off in a shaded corner of the sports complex, you will see a lone parent surrounded by others begging for answers. One by one they lift up shirts, raise pantlegs, and stick out their tongues, all hoping to get a quick curbside diagnosis of what ails them (or their kid). After all, it’s not serious enough to make an appointment, but annoying enough to seize the opportunity to consult that medical professional—even if it’s at a 6U soccer game.

My old college strength coach would yell at my teammates who were struggling to complete a basic power clean: “DO LESS.” You heard it here. Doing less is sometimes better than doing more, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

If you’ve been writing workouts as long as I have, you’ll realize that your desired expertise is quite parallel to that of the doctor. No, I don’t mean that you will be respected and honored, but rather, people will conveniently come to you with their fitness infirmaries. The strength and conditioning parallel occurs when a former friend asks for workouts, a local coach sends you their “program” asking for pointers and corrections—or, my favorite, an incoming college freshman shows you their Teambuildr workout and asks what a “seal-krock-IR-Row-Press” is and how are they supposed to do that to max for 15 reps?

When you become the beacon of exercise knowledge to many, you find yourself diagnosing diseased workouts when you should be relaxing and enjoying a ballgame.

Checking Your Trumpet Oil

In a world where so much training knowledge is at your fingertips (i.e., right here), we have to wonder why things are getting so blurry when our vision should be 20/20. The phrase that comes to mind is one that my old college strength coach would yell at my teammates who were struggling to complete a basic power clean: “DO LESS.” Yes, you heard it here, doing less is sometimes better than doing more. But the thought of doing less while trying to accomplish something difficult is a bit confusing. Power cleans, for example, require many consecutive and coordinated events to achieve a successful lift. We don’t want to miss any steps that could result in a failed rep—but, therein lies the problem.

We sometimes overemphasize the wrong thing and miss a much more important step. Therefore, doing less can help you maximize what really gets the job done. Less fluff, if you will.

In 2019, I won a local business award and at the ceremony, an unassuming guest speaker took the stage—there was nothing about him that looked impressive. From his shoes, to his tie, and even his haircut, he just looked like the kind of person you’d give a head nod too while standing in line at the bank. And yet, on the projector behind him were a pair of numbers: 293 and 216. Under his leadership, his company had grown 293% in three years and made $216 million dollars that year alone.

We’ve learned that using a weighted bat prior to stepping in the box SIGNIFICANTLY reduces swing velocity and accuracy. Batters reported that it felt better, but the weights did not improve performance, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

Those stats hooked my attention and I listened to what this Average-Joe-Business-Genius had to say. After all of these years, I still remember the phrase “trumpet oil.” He told us a story of a giant musical instrument company that had fallen on hard times and needed more cash flow. They had decided that since every trumpet needed trumpet oil, they would save the ship by selling an essential product. After a year, sales results were looking even worse than before. The problem wasn’t that they couldn’t sell trumpet oil—after all, they sold one with almost every instrument—it was that the profit margin on the oil was less than a dollar, whereas a high level trumpet could bring in thousands. Luckily, the speaker said, they began diversifying the kind of trumpets they offered and the company survived to tell their tale.

Periodically, I ask myself: what is the trumpet oil of my business or training? I always think it will be obvious, but it turns out I have to dig deeper and ask myself a series of questions before the light bulb goes off. As a coach, you might have limited resources or time with your athletes, and wasting any of it can hold you and your team back.

So, grab your stethoscope—or clipboard—and join me as we diagnose what is keeping your program from achieving the results you want in the time that you have.

#1. Is It Complex or Constructive?

Creativity can be a weapon for strength coaches to push and advance the field; however, just as some modern art pieces look like a toddler splattered paint on a canvas, so can our exercise inclusions. Too often I will see a video on social media of a coach showing a complex, 11-step drill to teach a young athlete how to “learn” a skill better.

Creativity can be a weapon for strength coaches to push and advance the field; however, just as some modern art pieces look like a toddler splattered paint on a canvas, so can our exercise inclusions, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

If you know Westside Barbell, you probably also know of the late great Louie Simmons, who revolutionized the art of powerlifting through creativity and invention. However, a video of him in 2013 coaching Olympic lifters created some controversy and got some laughs. In the video he had attached bands to a bar (as usual) and had his lifters perform their very technical lifts with the bands pulling them every which way.

The problem was not the accommodating resistance, but rather the lifters struggling to maintain their bar path with bands creating non-traditional vectors of “pull.” In the video, many of the lifters politely did as he said while smirking at the drills. In a similar fashion, I have seen videos of kids practicing their jump shots with bands attached to their wrists, ankles, knees, and elbows. The issue in these situations is that the athletes are unable to perform their normal skill patterns due to the “awkward” resistance and therefore could be building worse skill.

A classic medical line when treating a patient is “DO NO HARM,” but like Dr. Frankenstein, we are tempted to stitch things together in the hopes of creating something amazing—but it often turns out to be a monster. A great example of removing complexity is found in Major League Baseball. Comparing the early 2000s to today’s game, there are two major differences: smaller biceps and almost nobody warms up with a weighted bat. The reason is that we’ve learned that using a weighted bat prior to stepping in the box SIGNIFICANTLY reduces swing velocity and accuracy. Although batters reported that it felt better, the complexity of the weights did not improve the athletes’ performance.¹

What some coaches do not realize is that even our WORDS can complicate what an athlete is trying to achieve in the weight room. If we encourage our athletes by saying too many cues or even if we cue the wrong thing, we can reduce their skill and performance. Researchers are showing that by cueing internally (flex harder) rather than externally (push harder) reduces neuromuscular performance!² In many cases, the more we say in the heat of battle, the more complicated we can make it, and the less constructive it winds up being.

While developing a program or making a business decision, I always try and make sure that I’m not adding steps to achieve the exact same goal—or worse, take away from the desired outcome.

#2. Where Does It End?

Whenever you open Maps on your phone, it will sync to your current location and ask for your destination—the system cannot pick the best path without knowing exactly where you want to go. Many times, as strength coaches, we do the same for a program’s desired goals—bigger, faster, stronger, healthier, etc, etc. But then we implement exercises and drills with an open-ended philosophy of let’s see where this goes.

As athletes become masters of simpler movements, we might be tempted to add unnecessary steps that burn more calories but don’t build better athletes, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

If I don’t know the peak or end of an exercise’s progression, I can fall victim to the faults of Question #1. As athletes become masters of simpler movements, we might be tempted to add unnecessary steps that burn more calories but don’t build better athletes. For example, if I have 24 weeks of medball throw progressions, I make sure that each step builds the next one up in some way as we work towards the more challenging movement in the end.

If I simply started with an ambiguous throw and then changed it based on my whim, I could find myself in a never-ending storm of guesswork. I’ve found it’s always best to know my destination before I plan the trip, and my goal is the fastest and safest route. I know this can be hard for many coaches, because the temptation to find unique and new exercises is high—especially with so many people putting out such good content on social media.

When they learn about disease diagnoses in medical school, there is a phrase taught to practitioners: “when you hear hoof beats, think horse not zebra.” This is because it is tempting to see a common side effect and think of a less common disease! If you choose zebra as your destination, you might create a lot of work for the wrong answer. So, I’ve taken the philosophy of simplification—I am looking for horses and setting my maps to that destination. I am not saying you shouldn’t have flexibility within your plan; after all, I utilize autoregulation in all my training. But I am saying you should have an idea of where everything you choose will end up.

#3. Can It Be Reduced?

There is a product that every single American uses that costs us over twice as much as it should—yet, we pay the price hike without a second thought. Every week, when you do a load of laundry and you pour a capful of liquid detergent over your clothes, you could be spending FIVE TIMES as much as you would if you simply got a concentrated powder form. You can go online right now and get 9 kilograms of detergent powder for roughly the same price as a half-gallon of the liquid. This is because the transportation and plastic use of the diluted product costs more, and that cost is passed on to us, the consumers.

Unfortunately, as a society, we have become accustomed to liquid detergent and yes, sigh, even I still use the more expensive form. In the field of medicine, doctors work hard at concentrating certain drugs so that they can be better absorbed at the site of administration. Sometimes, in training and business, we keep a diluted product around because it is what we are used to. But massive change can be had if we figure out how to reduce it to its most crucial components.

By doing less in the weight room, we can see progress with better recovery, get higher-quality reps from reduced fatigue, and find more time for coaching, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

A great example is what we do in the weight room. I have had many high school and college athletes come and tell me about their workouts and how they couldn’t even get half of it done in their time window. Some of these workouts prescribed four sets of eight reps for 10 different exercises, all of which had high intensity percentages. Those poor kids don’t stand a chance. Some of them could barely complete their primary lift of the day.

My question is whether that much work is needed to yield a positive result. For years, my athletes and I have seen fantastic results with as few as three total sets of an exercise, including warm ups. Some research shows that even with one-third the volume as other groups, similar strength gains are found.^3,4 Even with more complex lifts, such as cleans and snatches, training with a moderate amount of volume seems to produce better results when compared to nearly double the workload, according to a growing amount of research.⁵

The same is true when running a business—it might be nice to have a receptionist, a shake maker, and a cleaning person. But when all three of them have hours of down time each day, it might be smart to reduce your staff and hand out more responsibilities. I learned a long time ago that none of these reductions should be looked at as a bad thing. By doing less in the weight room, we can see progress with better recovery, get higher-quality reps from reduced fatigue, and find more time for coaching. In business, if I have fewer employees, I can pay each person more while still saving money from the reduction. In most instances, we can concentrate our efforts to produce better results with less waste.

#4. What Is the Impact-to-Effort Ratio?

Every year, almost 66,000 Americans flip open their laptops and attempt to become day traders. For those who might not know, day trading involves buying and selling securities on the same day, often online, based on small, short-term price fluctuations. The promise of becoming rich in a single day by mastering the fluctuations of the market is so promising that many quit their jobs to give it a try.

Unfortunately, research shows that only 3% of traders have made any of their money back in two years, with less than 1% making enough to live on. From the outside, it looks like day traders are putting in countless hours of hard work, but according to the statistics, they’re basically playing the lottery—just with a lot more effort.⁶

There are many instances where coaches implement difficult and technical training modalities that simply add a whole lot of sweat for a small amount of success. Depending on who you talk to, some coaches believe that Olympic weightlifting is one of the biggest wastes of time for athletes. Rather than spend countless hours mastering the second pull, some would rather perform similar power exercises with lower barriers to entry. I’m not going to say the juice isn’t worth the squeeze, but there might be situations where doing less means getting more in the time frame you have. When I coached in college, we’d be lucky to have the men’s basketball team show up to one weight room day a week. We could have spent that precious time teaching them how to catch a power clean in the perfect front rack position; or we could have spent that time getting better results with simpler tools.

The same is true in business. We’ve all been to restaurants that seem to have an endless number of options on their menu, and let’s be honest, none of them are that great. Behind the scenes, that eatery is creating larger costs to purchase, store, and possibly throw away the large diversity in food items. That is why some stores like Chic-fil-A sell 25% the number of products as compared to their peers, usually only offering a whopping 12 items. By cutting out waste, they actually have one of the highest profit margins of all fast-food chains. When I audit my business or training, I’m looking at things that cost a lot of time and energy without bringing in the bucks.

#5. Is This Just to Feed the Machine?

My facility has expanded three times over its lifespan, from 800 to 5,000 to its current 12,000 square feet. Each of these growth phases were essential in seeing more athletes and doing safer, higher-quality work.

While at my second location, I began working with an old cowboy whose back could not handle the rodeo scene like it used to: in his words, he was “one bad weekend away from having surgery and hanging up his spurs.” Luckily for him, a friend at his old gym told him about how we helped his son return to play after getting hurt at school. He gave me a call and we got him back on the horse, literally. A year later, he VOLUNTEERED to be my general contractor for my third facility, saving me some major headaches and finances.

I tell this story because not only was he a hard working “son of a gun,” he was also a great business man. One of the best pieces of advice he ever gave me was “are you feeding your family or are you feeding the machine.” In his roofing and contracting years, he took his business from a two-man situation to a giant, multi-million-dollar-a-year business with dozens of employees. From the outside looking in, you would assume he was killing it doing giant million-dollar projects with a fleet of trucks and workers. However, he let me know that with larger projects comes more expensive insurance, bonds that must be won, and payroll that can sink a ship if you have a lull in work. At the end of the day, he was bringing home the same amount of profit with 50 employees as he was with five, he just had a lot more headaches during tax season.

As a business owner, I am always tempted to expand and take on a new project—for example, pickle ball. With the rapid growth in popularity, everyone and their dog has advised me to get in the game. Unfortunately, to do this, I would need to spend nearly six figures to get courts, cover, equipment, AC, check-in systems, bathrooms, and you name it. Not to mention the additional employee costs. If I take out a loan, I might see a profit of 1-3% every year—or, worse, a loss. All of that money, mental effort, and sweat would mostly go to feeding the machine.

In training, I find myself being tempted to do the same thing. Whether it is a new gadget, complex training strategy, or time-consuming drill, I have to remind myself that we might do all of this work just to feed the machine and not reap much reward. As a coach at a school, your AD might want to see non-stop action and exhausted kids, but you have to ask—“does this feed the machine (ego) or feed my family (team).”

Bigger is not always better.

Performing Your Own Audit

A good five-step audit normally helps me refocus and realize what needs to happen in my business and my training. Like a doctor running a battery of tests, you can find that some symptoms are not what you thought—and treating them with the wrong medicine will not do much good. Unlike the 2004-2012 TV series House, your mistakes will not be as complicated as the diseases he treated—but it is important to take a good look at the rash… I mean your program… and try to treat it before a bigger problem arises.

In many instances, I have been able to course correct with only one of these questions, but there have been times that after asking all five I still have to scratch my head to find the issue. So, whether you’re the doctor at the sports field getting asked to check out everyone’s minor maladies, or you’re the coach who falls into the trap of prescribing seal-krock-IR-Row-Presses for a 15-rep max, the situation can always be treated with a quick five question diagnosis.

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. Montoya BS, Brown LE, Coburn JW, Zinder SM. Effect of warm-up with different weighted bats on normal baseball bat velocity. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Aug;23(5):1566-9. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a3929e. PMID: 19593220. Otsuji T, Abe M, Kinoshita H. After-effects of using a weighted bat on subsequent swing velocity and batters’ perceptions of swing velocity and heaviness. Percept Mot Skills. 2002 Feb;94(1):119-26. doi: 10.2466/pms.2002.94.1.119. PMID: 11883550.

2. Lohse KR, Sherwood DE. Thinking about muscles: the neuromuscular effects of attentional focus on accuracy and fatigue. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2012 Jul;140(3):236-45. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.05.009. Epub 2012 Jun 7. PMID: 22683497.

3. Ostrowski K, Wilson GJ, Weatherby R, Murphy PW, Little AD. The effect of weight training volume on hormonal output and muscular size and function. J Strength Cond Res. 1997;11:149–54.)

4. Schoenfeld BJ, Contreras B, Krieger J, Grgic J, Delcastillo K, Belliard R, Alto A. Resistance Training Volume Enhances Muscle Hypertrophy but Not Strength in Trained Men. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019 Jan;51(1):94-103. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001764. PMID: 30153194; PMCID: PMC6303131.)

5. González-Badillo JJ, Gorostiaga EM, Arellano R, Izquierdo M. Moderate resistance training volume produces more favorable strength gains than high or low volumes during a short-term training cycle. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Aug;19(3):689-97. doi: 10.1519/R-15574.1. PMID: 16095427.)

6. What’sthebigdata.com. What Percentage of Day Traders Make Money – Statistics 2024.