Blog

Hopefully, the title of this article has already pissed off and confused many of you. Now that I have your attention, let me justify my thoughts and beliefs about the necessity of including running drills in your program.

As context matters, this is my world: coaching predominantly invasive team sport athletes (Aussie Rules Football, softball, rugby, and handball). I’ve more often than not experienced that neither the ability to execute any running drills (wall drills, A/B/C-marches/skips/bounds, dribbles, scissor runs) nor the qualitative improvement of those drills shares any relationship with sprint performance. So, I started to question how executing one skill has the potential to improve another skill.

I’ve more often than not experienced that neither the ability to execute any running drills, nor the qualitative improvement of those drills, shares any relationship with sprint performance. Share on X

We all agree that speed, or the ability to cover a given distance in as little time as possible, is an utmost crucial feature in many sports. Hence, many methods, traditions, and ideas prevail around this topic. With the increasing amount of information we share nowadays via a multitude of channels, it seems like we get to see a new running drill that “magically” unlocks the secrets of speed on a daily basis. This not only “muddies the water to make it seem deep” (Friedrich Nietzsche), it concomitantly increases our inability to see the forest for the trees when it comes to speed development. We urgently need a call for simplicity.

I think it is presumptuous to argue we need to break down a sprinting motion into its parts, learn or relearn the isolated patterns through part-practice, and put it back again into the whole motion. Despite the recent and increasing deterioration of humankind’s physical integrity, bipedal locomotion at a high velocity—aka sprinting—is the most fundamental movement pattern developed through a million years of evolutionary history, which not that long ago was essential to survive. So how can anyone not be able to sprint correctly?

The Emergence of Running Drills

The Polish sprint coach Gerard Mach initially designed running drills (A/B/C-marches/skips/bounds) to increase the work capacity of key sprint-specific muscle groups as regular speed work wasn’t possible due to adverse weather conditions in the winter and a lack of other resources. So, because actual sprinting wasn’t possible, athletes needed other methods to ensure (what we now call) adequate chronic workloads of sprint-specific capacities up until weather conditions allowed outside work again at meaningful volumes.

After several extrapolations and misinterpretation of this original idea, we now face a multitude of fancy-looking drills that some training professionals believe will manifest a certain sprinting technique and lead to better sprint performance in the team sport athlete. However, we subconsciously substitute the kinematic sequencing of the sprinting motion with actual sprinting performance. But what is good for track athletes must be good for any other athletes in an endeavor to improve their speed characteristics, so the drills are being blindly applied in team sports in the hope of a similar effect.

We all agree that the particular gains one individual gets from a distinct gym program won’t necessarily work for another person to the same degree. Yet we assume that a small—likely negligible—part of a holistic track program shares a causal relationship with the manifestation of track athletes’ superior sprint performance and therefore must be equally effective for an entirely different context and cohort of athletes, while ignoring all confounding variables.

Further, we must be aware and acknowledge the representative heuristic when evaluating the sprinting performance of our athletes. With that said, we tend to subconsciously compare our athlete against an archetype biomechanical model of sprinting (usually a sagittal plane view) and regard distinct kinematic features of high importance (think high knee position), which we then try to impose on our athletes. However, all we do is just drill them into a robotic and uniform sprint pattern derived from the same set of drills. It doesn’t seem like a step towards antifragility to me. Also, why do we feel obliged to enforce a change to what has been developed over long periods of time?

Your Current Technique Is Your Best Technique…So Far

In simple terms, we know that movement is a function of the organism, the task, and the environment, as defined by Newell decades ago with his simplistic conceptual framework of human movement. There are other important constraints influencing the appearance and time course of the movement forms that occur at the psychosocial level, but our industry doesn’t highlight them. Action selection can be conceived as a result of the interaction of task, organismic, and environmental constraints in relation to the psychosocial attributes (figure 1).

Further, the “constraint optimization” concept states that the behavior of a biological system at any time will always be optimal for the specific confluence of constraints acting on the individual system, as evidence from theoretical and evolutionary biology suggests. So, we must assume that the current movement solution (sprint technique) is the individual’s ideal; however, this is not necessarily related to an optimal performance outcome (better sprint times). But as athletes mature and go through sophisticated training programs, we’ve all seen improvements in sprint performances that come in the presence or absence of kinematic changes. Just because the current movement solution is allegedly the individual’s optimum, doesn’t mean that it cannot be improved.

Just because the current movement solution is allegedly the individual’s optimum doesn’t mean that it cannot be improved, says @DanielKadlec. Share on X

Therefore, our job as coaches is to increase an underlying and possibly insufficient capacity and/or give them opportunities to practice not-yet-experienced motor patterns and thus unlock new possibilities in relation to time. Or, in other words, facilitate the magnitude and timing of each muscle’s force production. As learning often involves breaking out of initial stable states, we cannot expect this to be a linear process. Now, you could argue for the need to shift potentially suboptimal attractors in order to engrain new ones.

Further, we need to agree that any physical improvement can only manifest itself within the limits of the individual’s adaptative capacity. While everybody can get faster, not everybody will be fast due to the limits of their organismic constraints as we need to acknowledge the inherent variability in anthropometrics and arthrokinematics between individuals. As highlighted previously, not everyone can attain the performance or motor pattern that their subconscious mind tells them to aspire to, independent of how much time and energy they invest to do so. Just because some athletes do attain those shapes, it doesn’t mean everyone has the same potential to get there. Hence, let’s all stop trying to force individual athletes into the same robotic patterns.

For argument’s sake, let’s assume there is indeed a technical flaw and we have correctly identified it. We then need to ask ourselves: What potential do we have to change or hopefully improve the athlete’s movement pattern while optimizing performance? What amount of resources (time and energy) will it take to optimize it? What methods are the most efficient to do so? Despite the complexity and uncertainty of this question…the answer most likely can’t be running drills, as they simply cannot provide a meaningful overload, as we’ll see next.

Running Drills and the Principle of Overload

We all know one key element to elicit any desired adaptation is the principle of overload. Therefore, we must impose demands that are greater than in the skill that we want to improve. Overload can take the form of any characteristic of force production, such as the peak moment applied around the joint, peak external force applied, size of the external resistance moved, rate of force development, power output, or movement velocity achieved.

Before digging into some detailed biomechanical evidence, let me raise this question: How can an activity done at 2–3 ms^-1 (in some drills, maybe up to 5 ms^-1) come anywhere near the mechanical demands of another activity done at around 10 ms^-1? This inherent difference in resultant ground force production entirely refutes the notion that we can improve any physical capacities. Any claims that running drills have the potential to overload any physical capacities mainly responsible for lower limb stiffness and/or ground contact times are, thus, laughable.

Any claims that running drills have the potential to overload any physical capacities mainly responsible for lower limb stiffness and/or ground contact times are laughable. Share on X

Another argument for the implementation of running drills is their claimed potential to facilitate improvements in rhythm, fluidity, relaxation, smoothness, and/or co-contraction (have any of them been somehow quantified yet?); hence, provide a coordinative overload or an idea how the movement should look. Without going down the rabbit hole of motor learning and skill acquisition, there is more than enough evidence questioning the presence of not just general coordinative abilities but also a transferability between—what I’d like to emphasize—inherent different skills. While sprinting is dominantly a reflexive, innate, violent, and subconscious activity at 100% effort, the aim of all those running drills is to consciously hit and experience several artificial kinematic patterns at 20–50% of maximal velocity.

When we look at tables 1–3 (derived from @DebsSides’ PhD thesis—I recommend it highly!), which describe the kinematic characteristics between a sprint and three different running drills, we see there are more significant differences than similarities. Therefore, we must really question whether running drills have the potential to provide any overload. Finally, we also know how important fun and enjoyment are for skill acquisition and motor learning—never, ever, have I witnessed any athlete enjoying or at least not hating doing any of those drills…

Simplicity Is the Key to Brilliance

Ultimately, only sprinting itself has the greatest potential to improve sprint technique. When you are not moving at around maximal velocities, you are working on an entirely different skill set while inherently undershooting mechanical demands. So, if you want to get better at the skill of sprinting, you have to practice that particular skill. Specific adaptations to imposed demands 101.

The major part of my speed training approach is to rely on mainly maximal sprints to promote the desired adaptations in the skill and capacity needed to hit faster and faster velocities. Share on X

Hence, the major part of my speed training approach is to rely on predominantly maximal sprints to promote the desired adaptations in the skill and capacity needed to hit faster and faster velocities. In general, the sprint is the first exercise that goes into the training plan and the very last one that gets cut. As the rate of adaptations slows down over time for each method, and the law of diminishing returns manifests itself, athletes need exposure to other specific yet variable enough methods.

We know from motor learning and skill acquisition research that task variability (differential learning and constraints-led approach) and implicit communication strategies (instructions and feedback) are beneficial in order to maximize learning and retention. Therefore, we need to deliberately add different methods alongside appropriate cues to challenge the current abilities and ensure a continuous progression in sprinting performance (table 4).

Because “tolerance is a proof of distrust in one’s own ideals” (Friedrich Nietzsche), I have successfully cut every single running drill from my program independent of what sport I’ve worked with. After the most general warm-up to increase HR and muscle temperature in the key muscle groups, I usually jump straight into (max) speed work. My athletes haven’t yet experienced any adverse effects.

I have successfully cut every single running drill from my program independent of the sport I’ve worked with. My athletes haven’t yet experienced any adverse effects, says @DanielKadlec. Share on X

Most likely, there will never be an RCT to test my hypothesis, so we need to rely on evidence from other sources and common sense—both areas just don’t have any meaningful and logical arguments for the implementation of running drills in team sports. In addition to reason and evidence, “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” (Antoine de Saint-Exupery).

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

Nine years ago, I attended a seminar by Ivan Abadjiev, the Bulgarian weightlifting coach who developed a high-intensity program that revolutionized the sport. During the Q&A section, one coach asked Abadjiev at what age athletes could start lifting maximum weights. His answer: 8.

Perplexed, the coach clarified his question by explaining that he meant maximum weights—as in 100 percent. Abadjiev’s answer: 8.

The audience was stunned. After all, medical experts had warned us that heavy weights could permanently damage the growth plates of young athletes, stunting their growth and creating permanent disability. Although Abadjiev’s approach is designed to produce Olympic champions and is quite extreme (involving multiple training sessions per day), there are many benefits to getting young athletes to spend a little time in the weight room. For starters, consider the demands that many of our young athletes go through today—those that only play one sport.

Athlete Development in the Specialization Era

With the appeal of scholarships and pressure to win at all levels, parents are increasingly tempted to encourage their kids to specialize in one sport, year-round. I’ve worked with middle school soccer players who played not only on their school teams but also on at least one year-round club team. These athletes had practice 3-5 times a week and games on the other days—sometimes several games on a Saturday or Sunday. Where I live, rather than trying other sports, these athletes are also encouraged to participate in twice-a-week sport-specific training sessions, where they perform plyometric drills and energy system training. The pressure to specialize continues in high school with what is often called The Recruiting Wars.

Video 1. Athlete Sierra Cuthill shows good form in the clean and jerk. Cuthill has played soccer, lacrosse, track (high jump and hurdles), and is trained in ballet. She started lifting at the age of 12, and by age 13 increased her vertical jump by nearly 8 inches to a best of 23.3 inches. Cuthill could perform a full snatch and clean and jerk with sound technique the first day she tried! As for academics, she is a straight-A student who is in a magnet program for business.

I know high school track coaches who discourage their star athletes from competing in multiple sports. Instead, the coaches expect them to participate in indoor track and outdoor track while also performing in track camps and demanding summer track workouts.

Likewise, I know high school football coaches who discourage their players from competing in summer track leagues in favor of participating in their strength and conditioning program. The unwillingness to share athletes creates considerable tension among a school’s coaching staff, with the athletes stuck in the middle. Is it any wonder that an estimated 70 percent of young athletes quit organized sports by the age of 13?

Besides the risk of burnout, focusing on one sport makes young athletes more susceptible to injury. One 2017 study of sports specialization involved 1,544 athletes (one-half were female), with an average age of 16 years. Those with a high specialization classification (i.e., focusing on one sport) had an 85 percent higher incidence of lower extremity injury. Yes, 85 percent! The researchers concluded, “Sport specialization appears to be an independent risk factor for injury, as opposed to simply being a function of increased sport exposure.”

Athletes who focused on one sport had an 85% higher incidence of lower limb injury. Weight training helps lower this risk. Share on X

So, what can be done? One answer is to have these athletes participate in a weight training program to help correct muscle imbalances that can lead to injuries.

Why Weight Training? Surveying the Research

One meta-analysis covering 25 studies of sports intervention methods involved 26,610 participants who, as a group, experienced a total of 3,464 injuries. Although athletes are always told to stretch to prevent injury, the researchers found no benefit from stretching. “Our data do not support the use of stretching for injury prevention purposes, neither before or after exercise.” In contrast, the researchers also concluded, “Strength training reduced sports injuries to less than one-third and overuse injuries could be almost halved.” And let’s not forget about concussions.

Studies on American football players show that strengthening the neck can significantly reduce the number of concussions. But there is much more to be gained from weight training than just strength. My strength coaching colleague Paul Gagné presented this year at the “Brains and Brawn Symposium” in Toronto, which focused on the effects of head injuries in sports. His number one takeaway from the symposium was that the best ways to avoid concussions are to avoid contact and learn how to absorb, store, and redirect force.

The best ways to avoid concussions are to avoid contact and learn how to absorb, store, and redirect force. Weightlifting trains these abilities. Share on X

“Take Wayne Gretzky,” Gagné said. “He was not a big guy or exceptionally strong, but he rarely got hurt—he had the vision to see the game in slow motion and instinctively knew how to move to avoid getting hurt. Likewise, my colleague Ben Velasquez recently visited Cuba, and said the boxing coaches he worked with appear to be following the lead of Floyd Mayweather by placing more emphasis on defensive skills with young boxers, not on increasing punching power.”

The ability to take a punch, Gagné said, is one reason weightlifting is superior to bodybuilding and powerlifting for athletes. “Weightlifters learn how to use the elastic qualities of their tissues to minimize the stress on the body and redirect that stress to produce higher levels of power.” Gagné added that flywheel training, which teaches athletes how to deal with rapid eccentric forces, can also be valuable for injury prevention.

Many SimpliFaster readers are sprint coaches, and I realize that some don’t see much value in weight training. But consider one study that found 27 percent of girls and 29 percent of boys quit sports because of injury (or other health problems). How long do young athletes stay injured? Well, researchers who studied 17 high school track and field teams over one season (77 days), involving 174 males and 83 females, came to this conclusion: “A total of 41 injuries was observed over this period of time. One injury occurred for every 5.8 males and every 7.5 females. On the average, an injury resulted in 8.1 days of missed practice, 8.7 days for males and 6.6 days for females. Sprinting events were responsible for 46% of all injuries.”

When studying these numbers, consider that an injured athlete returning to practice may take at least a week to get back to where they were before the injury. Can you afford to have your athletes miss weeks of practice during the season, lose many more weeks of training getting back in shape, possibly miss several meets, and perform below your expectations? If you can’t, doesn’t it make sense to invest in a little “pre-hab” work in the weight room?

Risks vs. Rewards for Weight Training with Young Athletes

First, understand that 50 years ago, we would not be having this conversation. The only athletes lifting weights were male weightlifters and powerlifters, bodybuilders, and perhaps a few football linemen. (Although off-season training for many football players often was basketball for the “skill” players and wrestling for the linemen).

That was then.

This is now: volleyball players do cleans to improve their vertical jump; baseball players rep out bench presses to hit harder; swimmers perform weighted chin-ups for a more powerful stroke; and hockey players do biceps curls…well, for no apparent reason. Although there are a few holdouts, such as distance runners, many coaches do creative scheduling to accommodate all the athletes who want to pump iron to perform better and prevent injuries.

At this point, the question is not if weight training is an effective way for young people to achieve superior athletic fitness, along with improving self-esteem, but when it’s appropriate to start pumping iron.

Facts and Fallacies of Growth Plates

Perhaps because pretty much anyone can post on Twitter, there is this belief that a high level of stress will stunt an athlete’s growth. Two “real life” examples I hear are that weightlifters are shorter than other athletes of the same bodyweight, and women gymnasts today are much shorter than those in the past. Let’s start with weightlifters.

The perception is that heavy weights compress the spine, causing weightlifters to get shorter as they get stronger. Russian research apparently supports this belief, showing that more experienced weightlifters tend to be considerably shorter than inexperienced ones in the same bodyweight class. Nice try. The reason elite weightlifters are shorter than other athletes of the same bodyweight is that they carry more muscle mass!

Elite female gymnasts—athletes who certainly place a high level of stress on their body—tend to be short compared to other female athletes, but for a different reason. Thirty years ago, the average elite female gymnast was 5-foot-3; now the average is 4-foot-9. Simone Biles, one of the greatest (if not the greatest) gymnasts in the history of the sport, is just 4-foot-8. The current level of competition is so high and the movements are so difficult that shorter athletes have an advantage because:

• Their stability is better
• They can rotate faster
• They have greater relative strength

The point here is that if you’re going to go with the idea that gymnastics training makes athletes shorter, it follows that playing basketball will make athletes taller because there are so many tall players in the NBA! With that nonsense dismissed, let’s look at some research addressing the fear that weight training stunts a young athlete’s growth by closing their growth (epiphyseal) plates.

First, premature closing of the growth plates is usually caused by hormonal influences, not injury. In the rare incident that a child injures a growth plate, the bone could certainly become deformed, but it will still grow.

One champion of young athletes pumping iron was the late Mel Siff, Ph.D., an outspoken exercise scientist whose doctorate thesis looked at the biomechanics of soft tissues. In his book, Facts and Fallacies of Fitness, Siff said this about growth plates: “Epidemiological studies using bone scans by orthopedists have not shown any greater incidence of epiphyseal damage among children who lift weights. On the contrary, bone scans of children who have done regular competitive lifting reveal a significantly larger bone density than those who do not lift weights. In other words, controlled progressive competitive lifting may be useful in improving the ability of youngsters to cope with the rigors of other sports and normal daily life.” Siff went on to explain what he meant by the “rigors of other sports.”

“Considerable biomechanical research has shown that the stresses imposed on the body by common sporting activities such as running, jumping and hitting generally are far larger (by as much as 300%) than those imposed by Powerlifting or Olympic Lifting,” Siff said. “In other words, the stresses imposed on the growth centres of the growing child’s body are markedly greater than those occurring in competitive lifting [sic]. If we well-meaningly think that potential growth plate damage is to be minimized, then we need to pay even greater attention to any sports which involve running, jumping, or hitting.”

What do today’s experts believe about the safety of weight training? Well, the results of a survey published in 2013 asked 500 experts in sports medicine if they agreed with the statement that weight training should be avoided until epiphyseal closure. “Overall, respondents answered that ‘this statement is very likely false,'” noted the researchers. “In sum, the expert consensus from our survey that strength training is safe for individuals with immature skeletons is consistent with data from medical literature.”

Why Serious Athletes Must Lift

Running and jumping are two basic components of athletic fitness, which is why many coaches supplement their athlete’s training with plyometrics. With sprinters, I found that if there’s a choice between plyos and lifting, their coaches will often choose plyos. In fact, in 1984 I asked Carl Lewis if he lifted, and he said that his coach often gave him a choice between plyos and lifting, and he chose plyos.

Can plyometrics help an athlete run faster and jump higher? Certainly, but the research shows that weight training can also do this and may do it faster—especially in the early stages of an athlete’s career.

In one eight-week study that compared weight training to plyometrics for improving the vertical jump, the weight training group did better—even though vertical jumping was part of the plyometric group’s training. Refining this idea, researchers have also looked at which is better for developing explosiveness: powerlifting or weightlifting.

In another study comparing weightlifting exercises to powerlifting, the weightlifters had superior improvements in the vertical jump. The researchers also tested the athletes’ power by having them perform vertical jumps with an additional 20 kilos/44 pounds and 40 kilos/88 pounds. Again, the weightlifters produced superior results, perhaps because the weightlifting stressed the elastic qualities of the tissues more effectively than powerlifting.

Young athletes who weightlifted jumped higher and sprinted faster. Share on X

As for sprinting ability, a 15-week study of 20 collegiate football players found that, compared to the powerlifting group, those players using weightlifting saw a “twofold greater improvement in 40-yard sprint time.” Yes, sprinters need to sprint, but if the goal is to fulfill an athlete’s physical potential, then shouldn’t a coach consider all available resources to make an athlete faster? And if strength didn’t matter for sprinting, why were so many elite sprinters caught for steroids? Just sayin’.

I often hear the statement, “A child is not a small adult, so don’t train them like one.” A better statement is, “You can’t have a specific program for a single age group because young people mature at different rates.” In a class of 12-year-old boys, some boys may have the physical maturity of an 11-year-old boy, and some a 12-, 13-, or even 14-year-old boy. Take the case of 2020 Olympic hopeful CJ Cummings.

Cummings began lifting at the age of 10. At age 11, he clean and jerked double bodyweight. Three years later, he clean and jerked an American record of 337 pounds to break the senior American record in the 136-pound bodyweight class, and last year he clean and jerked a junior world record of 425 pounds in the 160-pound bodyweight class. Certainly, CJ is an outlier in terms of physical maturity.

Unfortunately, many of the weight training workouts I’ve seen for kids are rather lame, doing little to develop strength, and few even consider teaching weightlifting (i.e., the snatch and the clean and jerk). Why am I a champion for weightlifting movements?

Weightlifting develops strength through a large range of motion, thus improving flexibility and stability. In fact, the overhead squat, which at the bottom is the catch position of a snatch, is one so-called functional screen used to determine flexibility and muscular imbalances. As for addressing the matter of risk versus reward, here are several proven benefits of performing the full lifts:

• Strength (relative, absolute, speed/explosive)
• Jumping ability (vertical, horizontal)
• Short sprint speed
• Muscle mass
• Reduced body fat
• Muscular endurance
• Core strength
• Cardiovascular health
• Postural alignment
• Body awareness
• Reduced risk of injuries

That’s a lot of bang for your buck, such that the rewards they offer are certainly worth the risks associated with practicing them. Short on time? Do some clean and jerks and back squats, and you’ll address many of the goals of a strength and conditioning training program. But even a more complete lifting program doesn’t take as much time as you might think.

My weightlifting coach was Jim Schmitz, a 3x USA Team Coach for the Olympic Games. Schmitz’s Sports Palace Team won nine straight team titles at the Senior Nationals, and he coached athletes in seven Olympic Games. His athletes trained just 3x a week, about 90-120 minutes per session, Monday, Wednesday, and Friday—that’s it!

Why are so many coaches reluctant to perform the full Olympic lifts, preferring (if anything) the inferior partial-range variations, such as hang cleans? One reason so many coaches dislike weightlifting is because they believe the Olympic lifts performed from the floor are too difficult to teach. I agree that the full weightlifting movements are too hard to teach—if you don’t know how to teach them!

I’ve been involved in weightlifting for over four decades, and it’s rare when I cannot teach a decent male athlete how to perform a respectable power clean from the floor in about 15 minutes. And with females, it takes about that long to teach most of them a squat clean. Many of my weightlifting colleagues can do the same.

I often see good athletes learn to do technically sound clean and jerks, and sometimes snatches, during their first training session. Share on X

Yes, full lifts take longer to master, but often I see good athletes doing technically sound clean and jerks, and sometimes snatches, during their first training session. For example, below is a video of a female multi-sport athlete learning how to snatch for the first time—she did a dozen sets, and the entire session took about 25 minutes. Rather than badmouthing these lifts, coaches should meet with an experienced weightlifting coach and ask them to show how to teach these valuable lifts.

Video 2. For those who believe the Olympic lifts are too difficult to learn, here is multi-sport athlete Samantha Dwyer performing the full snatch for the first time. This workout took about 25 minutes.

Can athletes reach a high level of athletic performance without lifting weights? Certainly. It’s the nature of sport that, all things being equal, talent prevails. Usain Bolt lifted weights, but the workout I saw him doing on YouTube leads me to believe that Bolt is fast despite his lifting program rather than because of it. Likewise, the success of many college sports programs is strongly influenced by recruiting. In contrast, at the high school level where recruiting is not an option (except for some private schools), you have to make the best of what you’ve got.

Final Thoughts

I agree that some young athletes don’t have the emotional maturity to train in a weight room safely—these athletes don’t belong in a weight room. It’s also true that some coaches don’t have the skills to teach weight training properly—these coaches don’t belong there either. As Spiderman would say, “With the great power that can be developed in the weight room comes great responsibility!”

It’s true that a sound weight training program may not transform a mediocre athlete into a superior athlete, but it can help all young athletes perform better and be less susceptible to injury. As General George S. Patton said, “You can never be too strong!”

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

Brenner, JS. and Council on Sports Medicine and Fitness. “Sports Specialization and Intensive Training in Young Athletes.” Pediatrics, Vol. 138:3, September 2016.

American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine. “Sports specialization may lead to more lower extremity injuries.” ScienceDaily, July 23, 2017.

Hislop, MD, et al. “Reducing musculoskeletal injury and concussion risk in schoolboy rugby players with a pre-activity movement control exercise programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial.” British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 51:1140–1146, 2017.

Milone, MT, et al. “There is no need to avoid resistance training (weight lifting) until physeal closure.” Physician and Sports Medicine, Vol. 41(4): 101-5, November 2013.

Lauersen, JB., et al. “The effectiveness of exercise interventions to prevent sports injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.” British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 48(11):871-7, June 2014.

Kelley, B., and Carchia, C. “Hey, data data—swing!” ESPN.com, July 11, 2013.

Watson, MD, and DiMartino, PP. “Incidence of injuries in high school track and field athletes and its relation to performance ability.” American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 15(3):251-4, May-Jun 1987.

Siff, M. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness, (4^th edition, 2000), 154-156.

McBride JM, et al. “A comparison of strength and power characteristics between power lifter, olympic lifters, and sprinters.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, Vol. 13(1):58–66, 1999.

Hoffman, JR, et al. “Comparison of olympic vs. traditional power lifting training program in football players.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, Vol. 18(1):129-135, February 2004.

Landing-to-takeoff (L-T) mechanics are critical skills for athletes to learn in speed and power sports. The discomfort for some coaches when it comes to coaching L-T mechanics for plyometrics (plyos) is due to unfamiliarity. As mentioned previously, it is obvious that, when performing plyos, athletes are often pushed to focus on a stimulus rather than on landing mechanics. As coaches and educators, we must understand the importance of what’s happening on the ground and how it influences movement, rather than just focusing on how a stimulus and response equation influences athletic development.

Landing Mechanics

Landing mechanics: the ability to deal with a landing and produce a takeoff.

I see landing drills or drop landings all over social media and in sport, and while they’re great for stabilization and dealing with forces, I don’t think they’re adequate enough on their own for takeoffs. L-Ts are considerably different from just landings. A stick landing may look similar to the kinematic sequence of an L-T, but there are clear physical differences.

Most of the time, landings in sport are the subsequent result of a takeoff or maneuver in the air. The popular stick landing techniques that are coached are for these sporting encounters—to find stability and to reduce fatigue and/or injury risks. Many common injuries or overuse issues are a result of faulty landing mechanics, in which an athlete is unable to stop the momentum of the incoming velocities when landing. L-Ts are vastly different in their aim to utilize energy. For us to really understand L-T mechanics, we have to delve into what happens in this sequence.

Although it may not be seen as a plyometric, the Eurostep move in basketball is a prime example of an L-T sequence that occurs regularly within the game. It may not be lightning fast like a long jump takeoff, but this L-T is of huge importance in basketball and similar sports for an attacking option to beat opponents in space. In the video here, you can see a prime example in which Manu Ginobili loads his left leg as he lands, and then unloads force to enable a change of direction to beat his defender.

Using a mirror drill to beat an opponent to a goal or objective is a simple way to introduce a Landing-to-Takeoff stimulus in training without deeming it an expert-level plyometric. Share on X

These simple but effective movements for beating opponents are a case of outmaneuvering the other player. Your athlete has to utilize force and express it at a faster rate than the opponent, and you can break this kind of movement down into drills with a partner. Using a mirror drill to beat an opponent to a goal or objective is a simple method for introducing an L-T stimulus in training without deeming it an expert-level plyometric. A fast-loading lunge step (bound) and change of direction loads a single leg with multiple times body weight at a rapid rate. This, along with a competitive situation, takes away the clinical drill setting that we may observe in a gym and creates a more specific L-T pattern.

Video 1. Landing mechanics

What to look for: You will notice as the foot comes into frame that the toes are up, which suggests a pre-activation of the lower leg in preparation for the landing. As the foot then comes into contact with the ground, it takes a split second to stabilize and settle, transitioning from the eccentric loading phase to the isometric force transfer phase.

Note: The mechanics of this landing might not be perfect, and ideally we want a full-foot landing to minimize stabilization time. Keeping extra time in GCT to a minimum is paramount for smooth L-Ts.  

You will now see that the foot is in mid-stance while the free leg swings through, as the isometric force transfer phase transitions into the concentric force unloading phase for takeoff. There isn’t much here to focus on, apart from making sure that the athlete finishes the movement right off the toe.

Keys: Use footwork tiers to teach landing mechanics. Using a softer surface at first (like grass) enables more of a feel. Use multiple landings to build a cyclical pattern of movements to build sensations.

What to Consider for Different L-Ts

Bilateral L-T: The synchronized coordination of both limbs allows for better control. Due to most of the load being distributed through the hips, the athlete can then trust the wide landing base. Incoming velocities for bilateral landings are unlikely to be fast, so prompt a full-foot landing that rolls through the foot and off the toes, which can support the maintenance of speed. 

Split-stance L-T: The front leg will receive a high percentage of the loading upon landing, while the back leg provides a stability anchor to facilitate better posture. The front leg should land with a full foot to deal with the load, with the back leg supported on the ball of the foot.

Note: Do not get these mixed with unilateral movements—there is often confusion with the classification of split-stance movements such as Bulgarian Split Squats as unilateral. They are not truly unilateral, and the posterior leg can offer support that single-leg movements have to create themselves.

Unilateral L-T: Unilateral landings require a much faster stabilization due to the reduction in the size of the contact base point for landings and incoming velocities. So, with bigger movements such as Ping hops, there is a required aggressive ground strike with the landing limb. If the athlete lacks the confidence to whip the foot into the ground, the likelihood is a passive landing and an insufficient kinetic energy production through the SEC.

Keys: Bilateral—if movements look unnatural, keep the focus on hip extension. Split stance—posture-driven, balance between the front and back, land simultaneously. Unilateral—keep things moving cyclically with the landing leg, focus on maintaining a set velocity. Unilateral L-T may be considered harder, but you should introduce both together. 

Video 2. Landing mechanics: bilateral and unilateral comparison

“What comes before will predict the future of the movement.”

A major factor for a strong L-T is the preceding action, and what’s happening on a neuromuscular level moments before landing. There are some valuable discoveries in studies (Mcbride, 2008) that have found athletes who produce greater performance outcomes in plyometrics activate soft tissue and pre-anticipate the ground long before less-experienced athletes. This shows us that more experienced performers prime themselves to actively strike the ground, and this is more apparent in highly dynamic movements such as depth jumps and hops. Worryingly, other studies are also finding that highly dynamic movements aren’t as intense as other movements like CMJs for some athletes.

If research provides us with evidence to show that athletes without a developmental background can’t utilize these bigger movements, then why are we using them, asks @McInnesWatson. Share on X

When you dig deeper, the athletes used in the studies have little-to-no real experience with dynamic training. This may suggest that in order for us to use certain movements to our advantage, we must teach athletes neuromuscular and proprioceptive control before progressing to more dynamic movements. If research provides us with evidence to show that athletes without a developmental background cannot utilize these bigger movements, then why are we using them?

Our question, as coaches, is how to progress an inexperienced athlete who is tentative in dealing with the high GRFs and lightning-quick GCTs to an athlete who strikes the ground with intent? And one who sequences this all in less than the blink of an eye?

Intent Means Well but Doesn’t Always Deliver

In recent years, many other coaches and I have seen the degradation of bounding (defined as a stride variation where R-L pattern emphasizes air time, vertical or horizontal, often in continuous rhythm). The S&C community seems to have changed the movement’s grace and natural beauty derived from the horizontal jumps. On a daily basis, I spot the stamping motion of concentrically focused bounds. This immediately confirms to me that an athlete has avoided many developmental stages of learning locomotive plyos and has gone straight to force-expressive bounds. This is just a small part of a whole array of plyos that are being forced onto athletes at the wrong stage of development and/or coached incorrectly.

We must recognize that the lower extremities (below knee) are the drivers of our first contact with the ground. Now, whether you want to see this as a ground-up or hip-down approach is up for discussion, but pre-anticipation of the ground cannot be solely driven from the hip in a stamping motion. Many coaches teach movements like bounding as a piston action from hip flexion to extension. They are not considering the finer details of how precise the foot and ankle need to be to deal with multiple times bodyweight in <0.25 secs.

Video 3. Concentric-focused bounds (Note: This video was created for learning purposes and is not the way I typically bound!)

Keys: Tough to create air time if the movement is cyclical, hard to recover foot = no time to prepare for landings. L-T won’t sound crisp and will feel flat and heavy-footed.

Note: You will find that athletes with a developmental background in plyos will perceive effort for even the most intense plyo as easier than beginners do. The unloading phase of a locomotive plyo gives a brief moment for the body to reset, rather than a continuation of held tension.

Resolutions to Building Better L-T Patterns

A large part of learning locomotive plyos on a developmental spectrum is the load-unload cycles we run through as we land and then become airborne. When we can recognize that the unload and airborne phase is equally as important as the loading and grounded phase, then locomotive plyos will become much easier to understand.

When we can recognize that the unload and airborne phase is equally as important as the loading and grounding phase, then locomotive plyos will become much easier to understand. Share on X

The lighter tiers, Footwork and Medium, feed into our ability to unload effectively and then prepare better for the next landing. We can all spot a tense sprinter or player, and we are quick to remedy these issues, but there are only a few who can spot an athlete unable to unload during a plyometric sequence. So the footwork and medium tiers teach timing and rhythm of force expression and preparation. Without this, an athlete cannot utilize the SEC effectively to express force through the L-T.

Locomotive plyos have the ability to feed the learning process of landings and takeoffs with their multiple variations, magnitudes, amplitudes, speeds, planes of movement, and forces.

Keys: All bounding L-T mechanics will be very similar. All bounds are about creating a form of air time. This regulates landing forces, and getting the landing right under the hip will initiate a stretch-reflex which gives a great pop to the movement.

Video 4. Variations to bounding

The learning that comes from a variation of locomotive plyometrics can provide proprioceptive and neuromuscular control responses. They help drive better pre-anticipative activation methods for muscles moments before landing. This runs in parallel with the adaptations that come at a tendinomuscular level, for dealing with eccentric loading and creating greater landing stiffness, etc. The CNS and proprioceptive feedback receptors begin to reprogram their anticipative skills for judging incoming velocities, falling heights, displacement of the CoM, the direction of incoming momentum, and the subsequent direction the athlete then needs to travel.

With all of this reprogramming and greater adapted tissues, the athlete then has the ability to produce a specific outcome need, like height, velocity, and direction of motion. This can prove to be important with in-game variable needs that may arise. The individual must be prepared well enough to produce what their body requires at moments of competitiveness. And who knows what our bodies will do to win!

Improve, Don’t Ignore, Your Athlete’s L-T Mechanics

The takeaway from this article should not drive you to neglect some of your plyometric practices, but inspire you to focus your coaching practices toward improving your athlete’s L-T mechanics. Our common denominator should always be how the L-T influences, and is influenced by, movement. If your athlete does struggle with L-T mechanics, then reduce your volume of ping work and bring them back to more footwork and medium tiers.

Our common denominator should always be how the Landing to Takeoff influences, and is influenced by, movement, says @McInnesWatson. Share on X

Keep an eye on how they move when they’re airborne, as this, too, could influence their L-T. Also, adding a small footwork and medium tier of plyos to your warm-up or activation series can drive proprioceptive and neuromuscular learning at a small price, but great effect, for your athlete’s programs.

Just remember that locomotive plyometrics should be dynamic and graceful!

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

McBride, J. M., McCaulley, G. O., and Cormie, P. “Influence of pre-activity and eccentric muscle activity on concentric performance during vertical jumping.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2008; 22(3):750–757.

Ever since I retired, I have been asked to do more personal coaching with individuals both near my home and across the country. I am happy to do this, but I find it challenging when I try to get these athletes to look at the films of their throws.

Filming your throw and viewing what you do can be very beneficial. However, I have found that there are a lot of young throwers and coaches out there who are not sure what to look for when analyzing film and therefore don’t get much out of it. To help with this issue, I always attempt to educate my athletes and coaches on what to look for when they analyze film.

Over the years of my coaching career, I have come up with some key things I look for when analyzing a thrower’s video. This includes the balance/positions and acceleration of the athlete through the ring. In this article, I will only deal with rotational shot put and discus throwing. It is not my intent to go over technique as much as it is to show what I look at when evaluating video.

What to Look for

The first thing I look for in the video is the overall movement of the athlete. This is where the acceleration of the athlete through the ring comes in. If you view the entire throw, it is fairly easy to see if the athlete starts too fast for their ability and is therefore unable to accelerate through the throw. Remember, it’s not how fast you start the throw, it’s how fast the implement leaves your hand at the end of the throw. That is where acceleration and balance/position come in. Most young athletes start their throws too fast and, therefore, are not able to maintain proper positions to help ensure proper balance, which is ultimately what leads to the success of the throw.

When I evaluate a thrower’s video, I like to look at two primary viewpoints.

The first viewpoint is from the anterior side of the thrower (that would be the right side of a right-handed thrower). I feel this viewpoint is crucial to video analysis of the thrower.

When I evaluate a thrower’s video, I like to look at two primary viewpoints: the anterior side of the thrower and the back of the throw, explains @JimAikens. Share on X

You can see the proper setup as the thrower enters the ring, in the separation between the upper and lower body as they enter the ring, and the proper body alignment as the power foot lands in the middle of the ring during the single support phase. Once the post (block) foot makes contact in the front, you have a great view of the power position.

Finally, it is very easy to view whether there is proper separation between the lower and upper body during the delivery phase of the throw. Since the knee is attached to the thigh and the thigh to the hip, I always look to see if the knee is ahead of the shot just prior to the delivery of the shot. (With the discus, I go by the shoulder of the arm holding the discus.) If the knee is ahead, that shows you have good separation between the hips and shoulders.

The next viewpoint I like to use is from the back of the throw. This position enables me to see if the thrower is on balance out of the back of the ring. It also enables me to view the path of the sweep leg and see if the right leg and hip are properly engaged at the beginning and middle of the throw. You always look to see whether the hips are ahead of the shot or discus shoulder. As you will see, each viewpoint has its advantages.

Video Analysis Apps and Features

There are a number of good video analysis apps that coaches and athletes can use. I used to use Hudl Technique a lot, but lately I have been enjoying the benefits of the Dartfish video app. It has both a free and a paid version, and a wide range of video analysis capabilities.

You can measure angles and time sequences and use a number of tools to point out various aspects of the throw. There are almost too many features available in the app to name. One of the best features is the ease of sharing the videos with my throwers. I captured the pictures below, comparing the two throwers to each other, with my Dartfish app.

Comparing Athletes for Analysis

The pictures below are intended to show you what I look for when analyzing throwers on video. I usually break it down to 10 key positions in the throw, and each of these has around four points of emphasis to look at. I feel that if athletes achieve these positions, then the opportunity for a good throw greatly increases.

A throw has 10 key positions, with ~4 points of emphasis for each. If the athlete achieves these positions, the likelihood of a good throw greatly increases, says @JimAikens. Share on X

I like to compare my athletes to another athlete, so they have a better understanding of the position I am trying to get them to achieve. I may use 2–3 different throwers for comparison in an analysis due to the fact that some throwers have certain parts of their technique that are better than others. Using various throwers for a comparison enables me to get the correct position across to my athletes. I also use the many drawing features available in the app to emphasize these positions. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

I made the picture sequences below for two throwers I work with. The first picture sequence is a male discus athlete who I work with being compared to a very good rotational thrower. I teach rotational shot and discus pretty much the same way. I am aware that there are differences, primarily in the middle and at the finish, but I address them individually on their own merits.

The second picture sequence is of a female discus thrower who I work with. In these examples, I am not so much trying to compare the different athletes as I am trying to show you how the different positions look with different people.

Keep in mind that with the more accomplished throwers, as I said earlier, not every position is 100% correct. We must also take style and personal preferences into account. Many more accomplished throwers are physically stronger and better athletes than the athletes I work with. They have developed slight adaptations to their style and technique over the years that enable them to use their developed strength and athleticism to their advantage.

Keep in mind that the more accomplished throwers may not get every position 100% correct. We need to also take style and personal preferences into account, says @JimAikens. Share on X

I wanted to show you a side view and a rear view so you can see they both have their advantages when it comes to analyzing film. As I mentioned, I like to analyze throws videos by breaking them down into the 10 separate positions and the approximately four points of emphasis in each position. This way, I can easily see and show my athletes the positions that they need to establish. Once they have a good visual on that, we can then go over the drills and skills needed to hit those positions.

The template I use for my athletes is similar to the ones below. I have found this format works well with all the athletes I coach, whether it’s an athlete at my school, a local athlete I coach privately, or an athlete from some other part of the country who I coach online.

Sequence 1. These photos show the anterior side view of the throw for a right-handed thrower. I compare my athlete with a more accomplished athlete in side-by-side photos, assessing 10 separate positions, with 2–5 points of emphasis in each position.

Sequence 2. These photos show the back of the ring view of the throw for a right-handed thrower, assessing 10 separate positions with 3–5 points of emphasis in each position.

I hope you have been able to learn something from this article. You may also find value in a series of blog pieces I wrote in 2018 for our local coaching group in Illinois, which described the trials and tribulations of building a throws program at a local school. The posts have a lot of good tidbits on practice organization and drills, and there are even a few good stories. If you like the series, you may want to read the rest of my articles from that first season at a new school to understand the importance of developing athletes for the long run.

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

I can still remember my interview for my first collegiate strength and conditioning job. The “whoa” moment (for better or worse) happened when both the head and assistant athletic trainers brought me down to the prospective strength performance area for the student athletes. As we walked by a sign that read “Storage”—a sign that still stands today—I remembered the phrase “have an open mind.” Lo and behold, they opened the doors and we were dead smack in the middle of a storage closet: 600 square feet of mops, ladders, low lighting, dirty floors, and a random array of equipment donated from the rec center as they started to bring in new equipment of their own.

To this day, I am extremely grateful that the university decided to give me the position as the first strength and conditioning coach in school history and placed me in charge of programming for more than 400 student-athletes. This once-in-a-lifetime experience molded me into the coach I am today, and any new coach offered a similar opportunity to start a program should do so—IT IS CAREER-CHANGING.

Starting a strength and conditioning program from its bare bones may seem like a challenging task, but it is one of the most rewarding things I’ve ever done as a professional, says @bigk28. Share on X

Five and a half years later, we now have a completely renovated weight room double in size, four fully functioning multipurpose racks (which may not seem like a lot, but it is light years from where we started), some of the top technology you can find in the field, and the experience of training teams that have won 44 conference championships, including three national championships. Starting a strength and conditioning program from its bare bones may seem like a challenging task, but it is one of the most rewarding things I have ever done as a professional. In this article, I will describe the six essential steps that I believe you need to take to build a successful sports performance program from scratch.

Meet With Your Athletic Director, Senior Administrators, and Business Manager

This might seem obvious, but it is the absolute first place you need to start: meeting with the people that control your budget as a department. While this may be a question you want to ask in the interview (yearly budget, small- and big-item budget, etc.), an administrator might not give an accurate answer since they may not be sure exactly what it takes to build up a sports performance facility. For example, our business manager told me on my first day that I had $1k to use on small-budget items and $1,500 to use on bigger items—this was nowhere near close to what was necessary to make the facility functional for an entire university.

Be prepared going into that meeting. Have a wish list of every single item you can imagine to make the perfect (for the time being) sports performance facility for you and your situation. Label item quantity, possible vendors to order from, and 3–4 prices from different companies to show you’ve done your homework. Again, they might not discuss this in your initial budget meeting, but at least you’ll be prepared when the time comes.

This is not the time to hold back on what you think you need; ask for as much as possible and let them tell you what works and doesn’t. The worst thing you can do is have $10k worth of equipment needs but only have the courage to ask for $1k, and then the administration happily approves, thinking you were going to ask for a lot more. Go in asking for $10k and have them bring you down to $5k—trust me, it’s the right approach.

The first big-ticket items I asked for were flooring, multipurpose racks, multipurpose barbells (that we could use for Olympic movements) and bumper plates, says @bigk28. Share on X

These are the people you need to sell your vision to because they will be the ones who ultimately control what comes of your sports performance facility. Just to give you an idea, the first big-ticket items I asked for were flooring, multipurpose racks, multipurpose barbells (that we could use for Olympic movements), and bumper plates. Those items I mentioned are all I need to run my strength and speed program.

Meet With Sports Coaches

Emails can seem taxing later in your career, but they will be your best friend when you’re new in the department. If you think that you’ll just sit back and have coaches knocking down your door, dying for their kids to work out…it won’t happen.

A handful of coaches may reach out to you because they had experience with a trainer in some form in the past, but odds are, if you start at a school with no prior sports performance coach, the sports coaches will have little knowledge about who you are and what you actually do. So, show initiative: Send out emails to every coach on campus, giving a brief introduction of who you are and what you want to meet about. Take care of the coaches who get back to you right away; those are the ones who will buy into your program immediately. There is no need to chase coaches down—when they are ready, they will come find you. (You will have enough to worry about in your first couple of weeks on campus as it is.)

When you meet with the coaches, just talk to them conversationally and ask about their program. Show interest in them and their athletes, as they are the most important part of your sports performance program. Have your sports performance plan ready as to what you would do with their team. This plan doesn’t have to be anything specific, but it shows coaches that you have already started the process of planning for their team. Some may want their teams in the weight room right away, some may want to have their teams only do “recovery sessions” on their field of play, some may just want a quick dynamic warm-up to get their teams introduced. Whatever the coach wants, say “Yes, coach! Sounds great!” You do not need them all-in on every aspect of your program from day 1. Just like any relationship, it takes time and building trust to have people all-in on what you do.

You do not need coaches all-in on every aspect of your program from day 1. Just like any relationship, it takes time and building trust to have people all-in on what you do, says @bigk28. Share on X

To this day, I continue to add different aspects of sports performance for all my teams and coaches. Whether it’s a new warm-up, new weight room plan, nutritional meetings, etc., you will be able to add in aspects of your program as time goes on. At Adelphi, I had six teams jump onboard right away for the first semester. By the second semester I had 12, and by the next year I had 19 teams working out in the sports performance facility.

We will talk about battles you will fight along the way, but you have won a big battle once you get all of your varsity sports participating in the sports performance program. Even if all teams don’t buy into your program, don’t sweat it. Fully commit to all the teams that commit to you. Those teams know where you are, and if they are interested, they will reach out to you. You cannot waste time on teams that don’t want to buy in when you could instead be focused on those teams that are already fully committed to your program.

Post Job Openings for Assistant, Graduate, and Volunteer Assistant Coaches

This will be a big ego check for a lot of coaches, because for some reason we want to do it all by ourselves. We don’t think that anyone can train teams like us and we don’t want to ruin the brand-new program we just launched. This is my best advice to coaches who are starting a new program or find themselves as the only full-time coach at their school: YOU MUST DELEGATE RESPONSIBILITY OR YOU WILL STRUGGLE. I say this from firsthand experience.

For my first three years at Adelphi, I was in the weight room at all times for every single lift group. I remember some days I would get into the weight room around 4:30 a.m. and wouldn’t leave until 9:00 p.m. This is not safe or smart for you or your athletes. Although coaches don’t like to admit it, you can NEVER give 100% effort working 10–16 hours a day. Trust me, I tried it and failed miserably. I was never happy, I dreaded getting up each day for work, and after eight hours of groups I was beyond exhausted and just muscled through to the end of the day. That isn’t fair to you as a person, and it isn’t fair to the athletes who always expect you to give 100%.

I learned a lot through my first three years at Adelphi, and I am glad I went through this grind to realize this isn’t the answer, and no coach should have to experience it. Go back and talk to your athletic director or assistant athletic director about the budget for your assistant coaching staff. To start at Adelphi, I was given a small stipend and credits. It may not seem like a lot, but there are people of all ages in the field who are eager for experience. Make sure you do your due diligence and thoroughly dive into each candidate’s background to find out the best you can about what type of person you are bringing on your staff. You can teach anyone your philosophy, so it’s more important to find people who are passionate about the field and have an open mind to learning new ideas.

You and your assistants don’t always have to agree, and, in fact, it’s good to challenge one another, but your message to the coaches and the athletes must be consistent. I was so glad (for many reasons) I got married at the end of my third year, and we had our newborn son in my fourth year, because it forced me to let go and delegate. The most important thing in my life is my family; I love my job, but you will never get back the years with your kids when they are younger. BE SMART; DELEGATE! It will be the best thing for you, the department, and your athletes.

Keep Your Programming Simple

On to the fun stuff. When you first start at a new program, you’ll want to make individual programs for every single team. You’ll want to show them you care, and an individual program for their specific sport is a step in the right direction. In my opinion, however, sport-specific training is one of the most fraudulent terms out there, used by people who don’t have a grasp on what they are doing, or who are trying to make a sale.

If you make a general plan, keep it simple. Odds are that most of the athletes you train have a very low training age and will make progress no matter what exercise or program you give them. With regard to the term “sports specificity,” I always ask the question, “What sports require you to be fast, explosive, strong, agile, mobile, etc.?” The answer is all of them.

Determine what your program’s basics will be and master those basics. If you have a rack, a barbell, bumper plates, and space to sprint, you can put together an amazing sports performance program. Stay away from the gimmicks (they don’t work anyway). As the years go on, the specificity of the program turns to the individual athlete. I judge my program based on the team’s commitment, maturity level, and training level. If they show me full-blown commitment and a high maturity level, and make progress on each movement, I will start to make the program more “advanced.”

If you have a rack, a barbell, bumper plates, and space to sprint, you can put together an amazing sports performance program, says @bigk28. Share on X

Once athletes show me the appropriate strength improvements, we move on to more complex training methods. But in your first few years, speed (sprinting), movement efficiency, and strength should be your primary focuses. Every other quality will benefit from mastering the qualities mentioned.

Define Your Culture

This will go a long way in determining how successful you are at the school that hires you. It doesn’t matter if you have the perfect sports performance program: If you do not show the athletes and coaches how much you care about them, not only as players, but as people, you will never get them to buy in. Take it upon yourself to get to know the athletes as people. Meet with teams before you begin your sports performance program to set expectations. Like the programming where you want to keep it as simple as possible, you want to follow the same principles here.

For me, the message was simple: show up on time, be respectful to your coaches and your teammates, and give 100% of what you had for that day. Sit down with the coaches and assign team leaders for the sports performance area. These are the athletes you will lean on to check the pulse of the team and help right any wrong that you may be experiencing. Today, kids want to know the why when they do any activity. Take the first few minutes to explain your workout and the why behind each movement.

If you can’t explain the why…don’t do that exercise. Everything in your program should have a purpose that you should be able to explain at any given moment. Will every athlete or coach agree with your program? The answer is simply no, and if you expect 100% buy-in, you’re lying to yourself. By the way, it’s okay that they don’t; but they should respect what you are trying to help them accomplish and that is to be the best possible athletes in their respective sports.

I tell every single one of my athletes, “This is your program, not mine…I give you the tools to paint, but you paint the masterpiece.” At the end of the day, the athletes will determine how successful the program is. As long as you put an honest effort into doing the best possible job, then you are doing everything you can. I simply relay the message to each team that if they don’t want to train, then don’t come. No hard feelings, but I only want people that have bought in 100% and want to reach their genetic potential. Not everyone will be weight room All-Americans and that’s just fine. We don’t want them to change who they are. We just want what’s best for them. SHOWING YOU CARE WILL BE THE CORNERSTONE OF BUILDING YOUR PROGRAM.

Failure Will Happen and It’s Okay

One of the biggest learning curves as a coach is that you will fail; and those moments could potentially be the best of your career. Failure is how we learn! We will not be perfect, and that is fine. It is through failure that we learn what works and what doesn’t. My failures, not my successes, are the reason I have improved as a professional every single year. Even in my 10th year in the field, I continue to make mistakes—but the best thing I do is acknowledge what I did and figure out how I can improve going forward. Constantly reevaluate yourself and your program and always be ready to admit when you are wrong or where things can be better.

My failures, not my successes, are the reason I have improved as a professional every single year, says @bigk28. Share on X

A Recipe for Success

To close, building a sports performance program from scratch will be one of the most—if not the most—rewarding experiences of your professional career. If you go from working with multiple teams to working with just a few, it will be one of the easiest transitions you may experience. By following the steps above, I have built our program to be one of the best in the country. I will continue to adapt and grow because we need to constantly improve as professionals. Remember, delegating responsibilities, keeping your program simple, and showing everyone that you care will be some of the main reasons you have success at your new school.

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 2017, World Athletics (formerly IAAF) published its first biomechanical reports since 2009. I do not know if any other reports were published for 2010-2016, but it was the Berlin 2009 World Championship data where I encountered the intersection of athletics and technology for the first time. In December 2015, my instructors for USATF Level 1 Coaching Education shared a few resources with my cohort to guide our young, hopeful careers. On Saturday night, as my subway banged its way back uptown, there I sat, squeezed and uncomfortably contorted between other passengers, with my eyes glued to my smartphone. The USATF lecture slides on physiology and technique from earlier in the day were good, but the Berlin 2009 World Championships Biomechanical Analysis of the Long Jump was mesmerizing.

I was star-struck. And I admit it took me a while to look beyond the still frame photography. The reports are truly a treasure trove of information. Whether you’re a coach, exercise physiologist, or an athlete, the biomechanical reports offer our community a better way to understand the limits of human performance. A team of kinesiologists analyzes the raw data from each event’s finalists and produce the reports, which detail everything from stride lengths to instantaneous velocities. The most striking observation I made was the relative stride pattern for long jumps at take-off. Out of 84 male and female elite long jumpers from 4 World Championships, 79 finalists relied on a long-short stride pattern to produce their best jumps.

If coaches want their athletes to develop this skill, they need to teach the correct stride pattern at take-off.

Not every report provides data we can translate into practice drills, but in the case of long jump, the reports are a valuable resource. As you might expect, faster athletes produced farther jumps, meaning the approach on the runway is a necessary skill to develop. As I’ve written previously, when an athlete demonstrates a skill 85% of the time, it will translate to their performance. Unfortunately, this doesn’t mean they’ll win the competition.

When my athletes take a good jump, I usually freeze up. I’m always looking for something to correct, but I quickly realize all I need to say is, “Good! Let’s do that again.” Then, a naturally gifted athlete with shoddy technique flies down the runway, hits the board just right on pure chance, and jumps way farther than my athlete. Maybe you can relate. This is common in high school sports, and college, too. We all know what it feels like to lose a competition to one of these athletes. The drive home afterward leaves you questioning your coaching. However, I refuse to believe this nullifies the hard work we invest day-in and day-out developing an unathletic freshman into a competitive senior athlete who scores points at the conference championship. Yet, in the moment, the loss certainly makes it feel like our coaching has been all for naught.

On the world’s stage, shoddy technique is a very unusual sight—for the long jump. I’m encouraged that the biomechanical reports don’t show evidence of such an upset. No medals were awarded to athletes who competed with an ineffective stride pattern at take-off.

In the long jump, the correct stride pattern at take-off includes an elongated penultimate stride followed by a shorter stride. This mechanic lowers the hips and effectively prepares the body to use its glutes, hamstring, quad, and calf muscles in the last stride. While I advocate adopting the evidence-supported stride pattern in the generalized technical model for the long jump, the wider coaching community continues to debate the technique.

Long-Short Take-Off in Long Jump Practice

Speed masks skill proficiency. So take it out of the equation. An athlete’s ability to use a long-short stride pattern is most evident from a shorter approach when speed is not a factor. I recommend a stride-stride-long-short jump drill to teach this skill.

Begin with your athlete standing feet together. Have them take a step back with the right foot, lean backward slightly, and raise their right hand. They should initiate the sprint with two regular strides, followed by a relatively longer penultimate stride and then a much shorter, flat-foot contact step to jump off the ground. It’s your job to watch their stride pattern and correct their mistakes. Here are some common errors:

• • If an athlete overstrides either step, they’ll go short-long or long-long. Let them try again.

 

• • If they go long-short but the jump seems flat, they probably didn’t have good posture at take-off. The right cue is “Chest up!”

 

• • Athletes may take too few or too many strides. Let them walk out their strides and try again.

 

In all circumstances, be honest with your athlete. Tell them what happened. Model the correct stride pattern for them and help them feel the motions pace-by-pace or at a walking pace. When athletes become more proficient at this skill, move them back and have them take four strides before going long-short.

Video 1. Coach Kaminsky demonstrates an effective long-short stride pattern at takeoff, compared with patterns that he does not recommend.

In addition to teaching the skill itself, you must teach awareness of the skill. Athletes need to know what the physical movements feel like as they drill the skill—both effectively and poorly. Only then can they make adjustments in response to your feedback.

In a sport where fast means everything, sometimes a slower, shorter approach has great value. Coordination may be more challenging on a smaller scale, but it’s more valuable for skill acquisition. Slower execution also allows you to observe your athletes’ movements more easily.

Biomechanical Analysis

Each quarter, USATF publishes its magazine Track Coach. I read every issue, and in the latest, Editor-in-Chief Russ Ebbets argues in support of technical models rooted in the fundamental skills for each event. Without reservation, I believe that a generalized technical model for every event is necessary and possible. As athletes progress, more nuanced technical considerations may become more critical. But any new considerations should build upon the generalized technical model, which remains reinforced by regular practice.

For example,athletes can adjust the relative length of their penultimate stride while maintaining the long-short stride pattern. If the average stride length is 1.50m, penultimate is 1.70m, and the last stride is 1.40m, they can adjust the penultimate stride to 1.75m while keeping the other stride lengths the same. Any such adjustment would require frequent reinforcement in practice to translate into performance.

In the end, it’s just a numbers game. One competition of 7 vs. 1 might not pass a test of statistical significance, but 79 vs. 5 provides a more reasonable justification for an accepted stride pattern. Last year, McCosker et al. (2019) analyzed the same World Athletics reports for a similar purpose. They determined that training design needs “to move beyond reductionist approaches to studying long jumping” because the current analysis is too frequently “provided by isolated biomechanical analysis of single jumping events.” I agree with the McCosker study. We cannot ignore the data. World Athletics collects a vast amount of data from elite competitions, and we need to use it to inform training design whenever possible, wherever appropriate.

World Athletics collects a vast amount of data from elite competitions. We need to use this data to inform training design. Share on X

I’m not a student of kinesiology or exercise science—my degree is in geology, and now I teach 7th and 8th grade. One of the most important lessons learned in middle school science is that a claim must be supported by convincing evidence for that claim to be accepted. Even when some small amount of evidence, like oddball outliers, refutes the claim, we must still accept the claim because a larger, more convincing body of evidence supports it. Just like long jumpers who go short-long and still make it to the finals of a world championship, we may not be able to explain why the outliers do not support our claim. That doesn’t nullify the evidence or its conclusion. Why should sport be any different? A jumper who relies on a short-long stride pattern may achieve a successful, competitive mark, but they are still an outlier. Their performance does not invalidate the accepted technical model.

 

Coach the Fundamentals and Let Air Mechanics Fly

The long jump’s greatest challenges are the approach and take-off. Once an athlete is airborne, they can’t change their flight path. They can only prepare to land. When new athletes jump, you can usually tell which landing style will work best for them because their natural, untrained motions resemble the style they’re most comfortable with. Style disqualifies itself from the generalized technical model. There’s no reason to demand a new athlete learn the hitch kick if the hang works better for them. After take-off, they’re going to follow a predetermined flight path regardless of how they choose to land.

You can, however, teach the athlete a better stride pattern in their approach. As the athlete progresses, maybe the hitch kick will help prevent over-rotation. You can adjust the approach and take-off concurrently with air mechanics, but that still doesn’t qualify air mechanics for the generalized technical model.

Let’s face it: if NBA superstar Blake Griffin can hang from the rim by an elbow after dunking a basketball from an alley-oop off the backboard, then anyone can learn to hitch kick, sail, or hang. It just takes time to learn a different landing technique.

The World Championship long jump data supports the long-short stride pattern at take-off, so let's develop this skill in training. Share on X

We should not excuse poor techniques for personal style. Instead, treat air mechanics as technical subtleties, which I defer to the athlete for preference. Relative stride pattern falls into a generalized technical model because it does not change as an athlete progresses with age. The World Championship data supports the long-short stride pattern at take-off and suggests training should include developing this skill.

Other Considerations

I may be overlooking how other variables affected performance on that championship day, but it’s safe to say that each athlete prepared exceptionally for their competition. Because they arrived ready to compete at peak performance, I’m even confident in the marks short of their personal bests. In other words, the total number of jumps speaks louder than the quality of any single jump. We can mostly ignore the confounding variables.

I’m not arguing that the way I learned the long jump is better than the way you learned it. I’m arguing that the way I coach the long jump is supported by empirical data and reasonable analysis. Nowadays, you have to stomach the science. Incredibly athletic kids with little training will jump far if they get lucky and hit the take-off just right. On your way home afterward, you have to ask yourself if they could have jumped farther with a better stride pattern at take-off.

A biomechanical analysis will not support every skill worth learning. But in the case of the long jump, the data greatly supports the long-short take-off stride pattern. Since we can measure an athlete’s proficiency in this stride pattern by relative stride lengths and its frequency in execution, we should adopt this skill in the generalized technical model for the long jump.

In good conscience, I must urge caution in how this applies to track and field more broadly. The World Championships biomechanical analyses are useful educational tools, but they can also mislead us. In events with skill progression based on speed and strength, like pole vault and hurdles, we cannot drill developmental athletes to imitate exactly the mechanics of elite athletes. In the high hurdles, for example, drilling three steps between hurdles for beginning athletes will not work. It will be fruitless and frustrating. It might even turn the athlete away from the event or the sport overall. Instead, we can place hurdles closer together so beginners feel the faster rhythm of three steps. The same athlete would also practice five steps at regulation hurdle distances and switching legs with four steps.

Teach technical models rooted in the fundamentals so athletes will develop skills to sustain gradual improvement while they get stronger and faster. Share on X

The biomechanical analyses exist to increase our understanding of the theory for each event. The reports are not published to frustrate or belittle the experience of a beginner, who so greatly wants to succeed. So dive in. There’s more than enough data and great coaches who can develop broadly accessible technical models rooted in the fundamental skills for the respective event. We need to teach these models because athletes need to develop skills that will sustain gradual improvement while they get stronger and faster.

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

Chris McCosker, et al., “How performance analysis of elite long jumping can inform representative training design through identification of key constraints on competitive behaviours,” European Journal of Sport Science, 19, no.3 (January 2019): 913-92.

Tucker, C.B., Bissas, A. and Merlino, S. (2019). Biomechanical Report for the IAAF World Indoor Championships 2018: Long Jump Men. International Association of Athletics Federations.

Tucker, C.B., Bissas, A. and Merlino, S. (2019). Biomechanical Report for the IAAF World Indoor Championships 2018: Long Jump Women. International Association of Athletics Federations.

Tucker, C.B., et al. (2018). Biomechanical Report for the IAAF World Indoor Championships 2017, Long Jump Men’s. International Association of Athletics Federations.

Tucker, C.B., et al. (2018). Biomechanical Report for the IAAF World Indoor Championships 2017, Long Jump Women’s. International Association of Athletics Federations.

Biomechanics Research Project in the IAAF World Championships Daegu 2011.

Hommel, H. Biomechanical Analyses of Selected Events at the 12th IAAF World Championships in Athletics, Berlin 15–23 August 2009. German Athletics Federation.