By Ken Jakalski

After starting my high school coaching career in the 1970s, I developed a philosophy regarding each event in track and field. I began by trying to define the difference between sprint and distance events. Much research at that time made that process easy, since there was general agreement on the following breakdown of the relative aerobic/anaerobic contributions to events:

• 3K: 86%–14%
• 1500: 77%–23%
• 800: 60%–40%
• 400: 41%–59%
• 200: 28%–72%
• 100: 20%–80%

The Rob Duffield, Brian Dawson, and Carmel Goodman analysis in 2005 [see References] was based on measurement of race V02 and accumulated oxygen deficit. Their findings presented a breakdown similar to the ones determined by previous research teams over the preceding thirty years.

I began my career accepting that the shorter the race, the great the anaerobic contribution. But what happens with the 800, a race I call “the twixter?” If research indicates it is a race with a high anaerobic contribution, how do I train athletes? The coaches I knew at the outset of my career worked 800-meter runners with their “distance group,” and the 4×800 was considered a “distance relay.”

There was one exception. He took sprinters not fast enough for his 4×100 and put them in the 4×800 and 800. I was surprised with the effectiveness of his 4×800 teams with sprinters running that event.

Doubling Up

His successes influenced my thinking about training for the 800. For the hundredth anniversary of Illinois track and field in 1994, I thought I would try something never accomplished in the modern era in our state—doubling an athlete in the 800 and 400 with the intention of winning both.

This athlete had amazing versatility and talent. He had been a Hershey National Youth Champion in the 200. As a freshman, he finished 18th at the state cross country championships, clocking 15:37 for three miles. That spring he anchored our state championship 4×400 after winning the 400 in 49.15. As a sophomore, he finished eighth in the state cross country championships in 15:26. At the start of track the following spring, I told him about my favorite track star—Cuban Alberto “El Caballo” Juantorena, who won both the 800 and 400 at Montreal in 1976. I added that he could become our El Caballo by accomplishing this same feat.

Saying that most coaches thought I had completely lost my mind would be an understatement. Not only would I be ruining an immensely talented sprinter with great potential in the 400, but also subjecting him to a near-impossible double. At state, the 4×200 is the only event between the 800 and the 400. He would have at best just nineteen minutes between races. Quite a challenge for a high school sophomore. He couldn’t even accept his 800 medal because he would have to report to the clerking tent for the 400 check-in.

So what happened?

He easily won the 800 in 1:56.79, then took the 400 in 48.38. Ironically, that was his best 400 mark in the four years he won the state title in that event. He ran 48.71 as a junior and 48.80 the following year. I never doubled him again—that had been our agreement.

Genius or Fool?

So was I a genius or a fool for challenging a thoroughbred with an impossible double? Further, was I risking his bid to be a four-time state champion in the 400? Perhaps this double might not have been possible in the larger of our two state classes at the time. But on the basis of his speed (21.80 in the 200), I never doubted he could win both events at the small school level.

The focus on the significance of speed for this “twixter” event began generating interest in the research community a decade later. It’s obvious to coaches that athletes run faster over shorter distances. But what I didn’t know prior to the Weyand/Bundle research published in 2005 is that, though speed does decrease dramatically the longer we sprint, this only applies up to a certain point. ¹

For example, my top sprinter will race at a meters-per-second rate almost double that of my top miler, but my miler’s speed is not double that of a 10K runner. These decreases aren’t incremental. In other words, decreases in speed are not uniform relative to increases in distance. This seemingly small point has great significance for those of us training sprinters, but up to this point we really had no way to predict shortspeed performance as easily as predicting distance efforts.

Why is knowing this so important? The sprinter who maintains top speed the longest is the one who wins races.

We know from years of research that top distance runners can maintain greater than 80 percent of their maximum aerobic pace from two miles almost up to the marathon. However, this isn’t true for sprinters. The ability to sustain anaerobic energy declines quickly, as most of us observe in developmental sprinters who appear to hit a “speed-wall” at about the same point in the 400.

Predicting Sprint Performance

As a result, sprint coaches would have an edge if they could predict high-speed running performance. To do that, we first had to determine if sprint performances, like distance events, conform to some kind of general relationship. Matthew Bundle, Reed Hoyt, and Peter Weyand found the means to predict all-out running speeds lasting from a few seconds to several minutes. ²

A formula for revealing decrements in speed has profound implications not just for predicting sprint efforts, but also for determining specific times (or distances over time) for sprinters training over distances considerably shorter than their races. In other words, the algorithm could be used not just for revealing current performance levels but also for constructing workouts. This required analyzing the difference between a sprinter’s maximum burst speed and his maximum aerobic speed, now generally referred to as anaerobic speed reserve (ASR).

The hypothesis was that a decrease in all-out speed in relation to the length of the run would be the same for different runners in relation to their anaerobic speed reserve. In other words, high-speed running performances could be accurately predicted from two variables that any coach could easily measure: maximum burst speed and maximum aerobic speed. That formula is now well known in the coaching community.

800 as Long Sprint

For me, it was the first connection to the 800 as leaning more toward being a long sprint determined by musculoskeletal force output rather than energy input. Using the Weyand/Hoyt/Bundle regression algorithm, coaches could accurately predict a runner’s times “from three seconds up to four minutes by analyzing the data from two tests: one that determined the sprinter’s anaerobic power, and another that determined his aerobic power.” ³

As the authors concluded: “Mechanics, metabolism, and performance differ fundamentally between sprint and endurance exercise. Although a common relationship has traditionally been assumed to generalize across a broad duration continuum of sprint and endurance efforts, contemporary evidence indicates otherwise. For endurance events, the metabolic energy available via sustainable, aerobic sources of metabolism predominantly determines performance by setting the intensity of the musculoskeletal mechanics that can be sustained throughout the effort. For sprint efforts, precisely the opposite is true: the intensity of the mechanical activity that the musculoskeletal system can transiently achieve determines the quantities of metabolic energy released and the level of performance attained.” ⁴

Ross Tucker, writing ten years after the Bundle/Weyand research, provides a further analysis of how we need to approach the 800, an event he describes as straddling the “divide between what people usually refer to as sprinting and middle distance running.” ⁵

Fast First Lap, then Hang on

Tucker sees this issue of the aerobic/anaerobic divide as a contentious one but believes there is “no black and white split between the energy sources.” ^{6 He} relies on good data relative to the way the world’s top athletes in the world run the event. Of the 26 world records in the 800, Tucker points out, in all but two the second lap was considerably slower than the first. The 200 segments from races with specific data reveal that the first 200 is fastest, with each succeeding 200 progressively slower. Therefore, a world record seems to require that you run a fast first lap and hang on in the second. Speeding up at the end—a negative split—does not appear to be an option for a high-quality 800, even many longer events feature this pattern.

Tucker’s conclusion: “I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say that if you are an 800m athlete, or you are coaching an 800m athlete, if you want that athlete to run their best, you have to plan for a second lap that is about 2 to 3 seconds slower than the first.” ⁷

A respectable time in the 800 in our small school class is 2 minutes. Tucker recommends a first lap in the 58s with a slowdown to 61 in the second. This split is not new to coaches who have observed a similar lap regression in their half milers.

Four-Time State 400 Champion with Ken Jakalski and Legendary Middle Distance Runner Steve Scott

Mike Cox corroborates Tucker’s analysis in his article “The Long Sprint: Reclassifying the 800m.” He notes, “In the first 200 meters of the race, the athlete must accelerate quickly to obtain a tolerable pace that is as close to their maximum speed as possible. If the athlete is unable to do this, they will not achieve the relative pace necessary to offset the deceleration effect found later in the race.” ⁸

Many coaches still advise athletes to run balanced quarters in the 800, but Cox believes that the even-paced or negative-split strategy will not allow athletes to achieve maximum potential. “Since the 800 is more of a sprinting effort, it is important that athletes maintain as high of velocity as possible before exhaustion,”9 he adds.

My observations from the early ’90s—in light of the Weyand/Bundle research, Ross Tucker’s analysis, and now Mike Cox’s recent insights—confirm that, even among the world’s elite half milers, the athlete with the ability to maintain speed is likely to come out on top.

Legendary Geneva High School coach Mike VanDeVeer, who influenced my thinking for this event, never had access to the research now available to us. His insides just told him that fast sprinters made for fast 800 runners. Mike may have been the only coach at the time who didn’t think I was completely nuts for doubling my sprinter in the 800 and 400 back in 1994.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

Notes

1. Peter Weyand and Matthew Bundle, “Energetics of High-speed Running: Integrating Classical Theory and Contemporary Observations.” AJP: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. 288.4 (2005): R956–965.

2,3,4. Matthew W. Bundle and Peter G. Weyand, “Sprint Exercise Performance: Does Metabolic Power Matter?” Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews (2012): 40(3): 174–182.

5,6,7. Ross Tucker, “IAAF World Champs—men’s 800m.” The Science of Sport, Sept. 2, 2007.

8,9. Mike Cox, “The Long Sprint—Reclassifying the 800m.” Track Technique, August 24, 2015.

References

Bundle, Matthew W., and Peter G. Weyand. “Sprint Exercise Performance: Does Metabolic Power Matter?” Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews (2012): 40(3): 174–182.

Bundle, Matthew, and Reed Hoyt and Peter Weyand. “High-speed Running Performance: A New Approach to Assessment and Prediction.” Journal of Applied Physiology, November 2003, 95(5): 1955-1962.

Cox, Mike. “The Long Sprint—Reclassifying the 800m.” Track Technique, August 24, 2015.

Duffield, Rob, and Brian Dawson, and Carmel Goodman. “Energy System Contribution to 400-metre and 800-metre Track Running.” Journal of Sport Science, March 23, 2005: 299-307. Print.

Tucker, Ross. “IAAF World Champs—men’s 800m.” The Science of Sport, Sept. 2, 2007.

Weyand, Peter, and Matthew Bundle. “Energetics of High-speed Running: Integrating Classical Theory and Contemporary Observations.” AJP: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. 288.4 (2005): R956–965.

By Mark McLaughlin

Lord Kelvin’s adage, “If you can not measure it, you can not improve it,” is intertwined with our lives on a daily basis in many different ways. Having a doctor measure your blood pressure, taking an exam in school, checking your tire pressure with a tire gauge, and tasting food to see if it needs more seasoning are all forms of measurement and assessment. Training athletes should be no different. As a matter of fact, we should take more in-depth assessments since we are dealing with human biology and physiology.

Figure 1. Student assessment in the classroom.

My motivation to become a coach came in 2000 after reading about some disturbing trends in the local high schools. Track and field athletes were sustaining significant injuries (broken femur in a cross country runner, anemia in three female runners, a torn hip flexor). My first task was to observe (subjective assessment) how these high schools were training their athletes. I visited four of them and noticed two primary issues. First, a majority of athletes at all four schools were wrapping their shins with ProWrap, indicating shin splints. Second, most of the athletes looked exhausted at the end of practice.

When you look at young people between the ages of 6 and 18 who participate in sports (38 million) and the number of injuries that occur (1 out of 10 = 3.8 million), you begin to see that something is drastically wrong. As these athletes become older (between 15-18), the severity of their injuries increases.

Figure 2. An estimated 3.8 million young anthletes are injured each year.

It became clear to me that a big missing link in the training process was the almost total lack of any real assessment process to determine each athlete’s individual strengths and weaknesses. Most testing back then was strength-based—for example, determining an estimated 1RM of the three standard lifts (squat, bench press, and power clean or deadlift). I never really saw any local track and field coaches timing their athletes’ sprints or intervals during practice to determine PRs, the number of reps, volume, or intensity. It was all very haphazard. Standard sport-specific endurance testing was all over the board and much of of it was irrelevant to the sport (including 3-mile runs for American football or 6-mile timed runs for basketball). Also, coaches never re-tested to see improvement (not that it would have mattered).

Theory into Practice

After identifying those two key problems in high school athletics (the high injury rate and lack of a standardized assessment process) I began putting my theories to the test in a practical setting at a local high school. I took over the off-season conditioning program for the entire football program (freshman through varsity). The first step in implementing my program was to structure a sound warmup that would prepare the athletes for training. They performed this warmup on the practice field or in the weight room. After that I had the upperclassmen do timed sprint on Mondays and Thursdays and the others on Tuesdays and Fridays. This allowed me to determine improvements. For the freshmen and sophomores, I established guidelines (strength assessments), and they had to meet certain strength standards—such as 25 good pushups and 10 chin-ups with strict form—before they could begin lifting barbell weights. Over the next three years I refined, changed, and updated this program as my knowledge grew, along with the athletes’ understanding of what was expected, and a culture began to be established.

1 in 10 young athletes are injured each year. Better assessments can reduce the injury risk.
Click To Tweet

After three years of coaching at the high school level, I was ready to begin training athletes in my newly formed private fitness facility. During my research before opening it, I felt I needed a method of evaluating athletes prior to training to determine their readiness. I heard about the Omegawave system. It is a non-invasive tool that measures the cardiac system of the athlete through HRV (heart rate variability), the metabolic system (aerobic and anaerobic), and the central nervous system (CNS) through DC potential. In as little as four minutes, I could have actionable data.

Figure 3. Omegawave Sensor and iPhone App.

I knew this was something I needed so I could provide objective feedback on how the athletes were responding to the training. It would embody the message and culture I was trying to build: improving performance while protecting the health and well-being of the athlete. The Omegawave became a staple of our assessment program right from the start. We tested athletes before their first session, then carried out physical testing (short sprints, jumps, bounds, strength, endurance, etc.) for an overview of their relative strengths and weaknesses for their sport.

We also purchased an electronic timing system. Now we had three metrics (Omegawave testing, standardized physical testing, and speed timing) we could track to determine the athletes’ progress in their physical development.

Success Stories

Between 2003 and 2015, I have observed some outstanding long-term improvements among the athletes I worked with. For example, A.J. Glass, who began with me in 2009 as a high school freshman, improved his vertical jump from 24″ to 34.5″ in 2012 as a senior. His standing long jump improved from 8’1″ to 9’11”. A.J. now plays running back at Princeton University.

Figure 4. Long-term development chart of Vertical Jump for AJ Glass via Omegawave.

Another athlete I worked with was Owen Marecic, who started with me during his junior year of high school. When he began he weighed 210 pounds, had a 29″ vertical jump, squat of 335×1, bench press 240×1, and standing long jump of 8’2″. Six months later, Owen weighed 239 pounds, his vertical jump had increased to 36″ and his standing long jump to 9’11”, he squatted 365 pounds x 21 reps, and bench pressed 335×1. Owen played at Stanford University, where he won the inaugural Paul Hornung Award as the nation’s most versatile major college player. He had a three-year NFL career with the Cleveland Browns and San Francisco 49ers.

Figure 5. Owen Marecic HRV assessment via Omegawave.

A third example is Mike Petroff, a current high school football player. Mike started with me in 2010 as a 12-year-old weighing 131 pounds at 5’6″. His resting heart rate was 57 bpm, his vertical jump was 20.5″, and he ran the 40-yard dash in 5.3 seconds. Fast-forward to the summer of 2015. Mike is 6’1″, weighs 229 pounds, has a resting heart rate of 36 bpm, a vertical jump of 36.5″, and runs the 40-yard dash in 4.67.

Figure 6. Long-term development chart of Vertical Jump for Mike Petroff via Omegawave.

Figure 7. Mike Petroff HRV assessment via Omegawave.

The assessments I have used have stayed very consistent over the years, as I am trying to master the basics before investing in the next best thing on the internet. Currently I am testing three additional types of assessments on myself and hope to have them integrated into our set of metrics over the next 6-12 months.

Additional Assessment Methods

The first is the Moxy Monitor. Moxy uses light from the near-infrared wavelength spectrum (light from about 670 to 810 nm) to measure oxygenation levels in muscle tissue. Human tissue has a low optical absorbance of near-infrared light so the light can travel to reasonable depths. The near-infrared wavelength range is particularly useful because hemoglobin and myoglobin change color in that range, depending on whether or not they are carrying oxygen. To find out what your limiting factors are using the Moxy assessment, you first attach the device to working and sometimes non-working muscles. Through this assessment, which is relayed in real time to a computer or television screen, you see current heart rate, bike wattage via a trainer or running speed on a treadmill, along with Sm02 (muscle oxygenation/utilization) and tHB (blood flow/delivery).

To conduct a step test on a bike trainer using Moxy, you might do the first step at 100 watts for 4 minutes, a 1-minute rest, 100 watts again for 4 minutes, another 1-minute rest, and then increase the wattage to 120. The test is carried out over 5-6 steps in this manner. With the data being captured in real time during these steps and reaching failure at the end of the assessment, you get an accurate personalized picture regarding the limiting factor. In my case, here is a short recap from David Richter of Herriott Sport Performance in Seattle after my first bike-specific Moxy test.

You were limited by recruitment. If a muscle can’t utilize O2 any longer, the brain shuts down recruitment. You had available O2, but couldn’t use it. How do you use it? There’s a thing called the Dissociation Curve. It controls your bioavailability of O2. A rightward shift causes a decreased affinity for O2. This makes it difficult for hemoglobin to bind to O2. But it makes it easier for hemoglobin to release O2 bound to it. A leftward shift in the curve causes an increased affinity for O2…hemoglobin binds with O2 more easily. But it unloads more reluctantly. You need to move the curve to the right (to release O2)…only when you’re near maximum effort. Then back to the left (to pick up O2).

Figure 8. Moxy measures oxygenation levels in muscle tissue.

As you can see, the observations based on my initial assessment are far more detailed than just telling me I need to go out and ride longer/faster/harder. Here are the suggestions David gave me to begin improving my weak points.

Can you see the catch-22? It’s a shell game. It’s a game that is tough to control. It’s a game that is played by your brain, whether you like it, or not. But there are some things that you can do to take temporarily control of that curve. Breathing coordination is how you accomplish that…you can temporarily take charge of that curve by regulating CO2. An increase in CO2 results in a decrease in blood pH. But that’s where you play with fire. If you can’t get rid of that CO2, then you have a different problem.

Better breathing coordination will make you better…and help with recruitment.

The second assessment is the Misfit Flash, a fitness tracker and sleep monitor I use purely to monitor my sleep. It is a very inexpensive way to look at sleep quality and duration, which are important factors related to recuperation.

Figure 9. Misfit Flash used to monitor sleep.

Inside Tracker

The third assessment, which I just started in June, is blood analysis from InsideTracker. The company’s literature states that

InsideTracker is a personalized health analytics company founded by leading scientists, physicians, nutritionists and exercise physiologists from MIT, Harvard and Tufts University. The InsideTracker platform tracks and analyzes key biochemical and physiological markers and applies sophisticated algorithms and large scientific databases to determine personalized optimal zones for each marker. InsideTracker’s expert system offers science-driven nutrition and lifestyle interventions that empower people to optimize their markers. When optimized, these marker levels have been scientifically proven to increase vitality, improve performance and extend life.

Our goal is to empower individuals with the essential information they need to manage and optimize their health. We believe that by providing a dynamic, personalized analytic platform at the intersection of biology, science and technology, then distilling the results into simple, natural, and sustainable nutrition and lifestyle recommendations to follow, we can help people live longer, healthier lives.

The information InsideTracker provided after my initial assessment was excellent, because I now had a point from which to begin. InsideTracker categorizes your results as high, normal, optimal, and low. After looking at the 30 biomarkers I had tested and speaking with Carl Valle and another highly respected colleague, I began with the low-hanging fruit. The three biomarkers I set out to attack first were vitamin D, testosterone, and blood glucose.

Figure 10. InsideTracker Testosterone test results.

My vitamin D level was 36 ng/ml, and for my age InsideTracker recommends optimal levels at 40-48. So my first task was increasing my vitamin D supplementation to 10,000 IU per day (previousIy I was only taking 4,000). The next marker was my testosterone level, which at 302 ng/dl was low for my age. Optimal levels prescribed by InsideTracker are between 419-1179. To begin addressing this issue, I focused on improving my sleep quality with basic and actionable steps (no phone/tablets/computer 2 hours prior to bed, 1 hour prior begin to read a book, have set sleep/waking times, and supplementation with 30mg of zinc before bed).

Figure 11. InsideTracker Vitamin D test results.

The final piece needing work was my blood glucose. After the first assessment, I was at 88mg/dl. Analyzing my nutrition prior to this, I realized I was not getting adequate fiber in my diet. I focused on getting at least 40g of fiber per day through foods such as oranges, blackberries, raspberries, Fiber One cereal, and whole grain bread. I eliminated any gels/bars I might eat during a long bike ride. This was one of the few tests that I had re-tested through my doctor and after a month it dropped down to 78mg/dl, which was now in my optimal zone of 65-83. Within the next month, I will be getting a re-test to see how the changes in lifestyle and nutrition have affected my biomarkers.

Figure 12. InsideTracker Glucose test results.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

By: Peter Holmertz, President, 1080 Motion, North America

Interested in new technology that pushes the envelope in strength, speed, and power training? Then this article is for you. It’s the story of how Malmö Sports Academy (MIA) in Sweden became one of the first users of the 1080 Quantum system. Today MIA uses the Quantum’s robotic resistance technology to train a group of 50 elite-level athletes across 17 different sports. Welcome to Sweden and the Malmö Sports Academy, the home of iconic trainer and coach Kenneth Riggberger and visionary general manager Jan-Olov Jakobsson.

In 2011, MIA and the then-startup company 1080 Motion agreed to deploy the first version of the Quantum system for comprehensive use. If you are unfamiliar with robotic resistance, Quantum technology requires some explanation. There are no weights, air cylinders, or other traditional hardware inside the unit. Instead, it has a powerful electric servo motor controlled by a computer. The result is a resistance training and testing device in which you control and manipulate resistance type, load, and movement speed to create training modalities not possible with other types of equipment.

A Variety of Uses

With the push of a button, for example, you can overload the eccentric phase of a repetition by up to 200% relative to the concentric load. You can do ballistic training at high speeds and loads for power maximization without dealing with a real mass that jolts joints and soft tissue on the rebound. The Quantum can be set up as an isotonic (constant load no matter the speed) resistance device free from inertia when rehabilitating athletes or if you’re into isotonic training at high speeds. Or you can use it in isokinetic (constant and typically low speed no matter the force) mode for max force development and hypertrophy. The system can even provide useful vibration for working on injured muscles and tendons.

The Quantum’s “ballistic” mode is unique. Used for training power and explosiveness, it is particularly valuable for MIA’s elite athletes. The great difference with other resistance technology is how this feature deals with inertia in the various phases of a repetition. Using the ballistic setting, the system behaves just like a regular mass as long as you are increasing movement speed in a repetition. This means the athlete must overcome the natural counterforce of inertia that the body must be proficient at handling when running, jumping, swinging a bat, or throwing a football.

Kenneth Riggberger and Jan-Olov Jakobsson with 1080 Quantum.

However, there’s a major difference when the movement speed is leveling out or decreasing in that same repetition. The Quantum system takes away the “free ride” the athlete would normally get when working concentrically with a regular mass that has built up speed and momentum. As a result, the athlete has full contact with the resistance during the entire range of movement, independent of acceleration and deceleration.

If we talk about training as inducing neuromuscular stress, this is stress maximization causing the athlete to produce about 30% more average power compared to a repetition using the same load but with a normal weight. This increased intensity is fundamentally different from any other resistance training whether with a normal mass, air-powered isotonic system, bungee cord, or flywheel. Combine this with eccentric overload and you’ll realize this is new and exciting territory for strength and conditioning.

The Quantum system accurately measures how much force, power, and speed is created in every repetition with separate readings of the concentric and eccentric phases of the movement. With all things combined, it’s a unique training tool that provides real-time performance data.

Talking with Riggberger

The coach is at home on a Sunday afternoon when I interview him. I want to learn about his experiences in working with some of Sweden’s best athletes.

He takes me to the early months of 2011 when he experimented with the Quantum to understand how best to use it. At that time, only a few had been built and—unlike today—there was no broad knowledge base to lean on. Riggberger, like any strength coach working with elite athletes, has a tremendous responsibility to give them the best physical foundation to succeed in competition.

Being confronted with a new and potentially extreme training tool can present a dilemma. Even if you logically understand the benefits of a new training method, the last thing you want is to compromise your athletes’ next season or increase their risk of injury. Playing safe is natural, but at the same time, everything we do in elite sports is keyed to maximize the chance of winning.

Riggberger explains that the first time he tested the Quantum it took 3 minutes to realize its potential, but he needed several months of incremental learning to implement it since there was no experience with the system at the time. He adds, “We were the early explorers, but now there are more users like us. Research institutions have also understood this is something unique and are studying on the effects of this type of training.”

He also points out that the system needs to be applied appropriately for different levels of athletes. Since the Quantum is capable of making training more extreme than regular weight training (or less if the task is to rehabilitate), you have to know the limits of application in relation to individual athletes. There’s a huge difference between a youth athlete in early puberty and a D1 football player or sprinter competing internationally. The Quantum is like driving a sports car: Having 600 horsepower under the hood doesn’t mean you can go full throttle at all times. But when the road is wide and straight—pedal to the metal!

Riggberger states, “The Quantum is not to be thought of like traditional weight training. It’s easy to make that assumption when you use it for squats and presses because it looks the same to the eye. But other than the bar itself it has nothing to do with a regular weight that’s always influenced by the same rate of gravity no matter what you do. Just like any advanced form of training like plyometric jumps, you use it with great care and precision depending on the capability of the athlete.”

Getting Results

With the background of how Riggberger approached his new tool, I was eager to get to the heart of the story: what kinds of results has the Quantum delivered?

Like most coaches, Riggberger works with many athletes and has limited time for experimentation and documenting results. But he decided to systematically use the system for a specific purpose and document the results into published case studies with three elite athletes (a hurdler, a long jumper, and a discus thrower). Riggberger can discuss the first two while the third is still a work in progress. For the more scientifically minded reader, these and other studies and additional facts are published on 1080 Motion’s website.

Let’s look at the 110m hurdler (13.47). Riggberger wanted to explore his belief that the Quantum system can be effective for brief but high-intensity strength training during the competitive season. Extensive weight-based training within the season increases the injury risk and is a challenge to balance with other training and competition cycles. Riggberger hoped the Quantum system would reduce the athlete’s total training volume and injury risk while maintaining leg power performance.

The study lasted nine weeks, during which the only form of weight training was 6 sessions with single-leg squats, 2 sets of 5 reps on each leg. That’s an average of just one session per 10.5 days! The protocol was a concentric load of 119 kg/262 lbs with no speed limitation and 139 kg/306 lbs in the eccentric phase at 4 m/s speed. That implies a 17% eccentric overload and an exaggerated eccentric speed, causing the quad musculature to stretch more quickly compared to a regular barbell squat.

1080 Quantum provides precise control of resistance type, load, and movement speed.
Click To Tweet

Riggberger’s theory is that the ability to assist with speed in the eccentric phase creates a greater loading in the stretch-shortening cycle, thereby helping to maximize fast-twitch fiber activation. The 17% overloaded eccentric load contributes to this process. Since this is a very intense way of doing single-leg squat the athlete needed a 10-minute rest between sets. Riggberger kept track of the total training time and concluded that for each session the athlete only worked under tension for 8 seconds concentrically and 6 seconds eccentrically.

In total over the 9 weeks, the combined time under tension—concentrically and eccentrically—was no more than 1 minute and 26 seconds. Measuring the change in power with both the Quantum’s internal data and a separate bar speed encoder for verification, Riggberger concluded that concentric power had increased by 32% on the left leg and 35% on the right, with eccentric power increasing by 24% and 10% respectively. Peak velocity went up 29% and 11% percent while time-to-peak velocity improved by 12% and 19%. Riggberger also tested the athlete in four different jump tests and documented an across-the-board improvement.

Says Riggberger,“I was quite surprised to see this kind of improvement from such limited and infrequent training, especially in an athlete that was at a very high-performance level to start with. My goal was to be able to maintain power performance, but instead I got a major improvement”.

Video 1. High-intensity single leg squats. Isokinetic concentric phase and 17% eccentric overload.

Long Jumper

Riggberger’s second case involved a long jumper with a personal best of 8.25 meters (27.07 feet). The aim of the study was similar to the first case: verifying the effect of a short-duration/high-load strength program. Here the single-leg squat study lasted 3 weeks, with two sessions per week. The concentric load was 121 kg/267 lbs and the eccentric 141 kg/311 lbs. The results were similar to the hurdler: concentric power increased by 16% on the left leg and 12% on the right while time-to-peak-velocity improved by 38% on both legs.

Riggbergersaid, “Overall the results show greater improvements on the left leg. Since this is a right-leg long jumper, the right leg is naturally more developed so it’s not surprising to see greater improvements on the left where the relative improvement potential should be greater. It was still a big deal for me to be able to see a 12% power increase on the leg that hits the plank. It tells me we took a world-class athlete a good step further on his performance curve.”

I asked Riggberger to sum up his experience of implementing the Quantum system at MIA. “I’m confident to say at this time that there is nothing to compare with if you look at how quickly we get results from this system,” he noted. “I have developed a four-stage training model that we use broadly. It essentially starts with conditioning the athlete to greater intensity but at highly controlled movement speeds. From there, training progresses to greater intensity using a combination of isokinetic loads and high speeds. All the time we overload the eccentric phase to maximize the athlete’s ability to absorb the energy needed to explode concentrically.

“With this model, we get great and predictable results while reducing the risk for training injuries. Also, when I train sprinters and other sports where only one leg at a time is used, I exclusively do single leg strength training. I have measured this many times and can only conclude that two-legged training does not transfer optimally into single-leg performance. It’s a great tool for performing the more advanced single-leg power training using high loads and exaggerated movement speeds.”

Additional Perspective

After wrapping up with Riggberger, I called his boss, MIA General Manager Jan-Olov Jacobsson to get some perspective. I immediately sensed he is a highly energetic and forward-looking man who is very proud of his team. He explains how MIA is a major force for elite sports development in Sweden.

Commenting on the use of the Quantum, he explains, “We develop top talent, and we need state-of-the art-facilities and equipment to attract the very best to come here. The Quantum is an important part of the service we provide these athletes. This year we have also started to use the new 1080 Sprint system that uses the same technology but for up to 90-meter sprints.

“Sometimes new athletes and coaches are skeptical to new tools and methods, but once they start using the system, they tell us how the training makes them feel more explosive. It’s hard to put your finger on it, but it does something different that people like. Thanks to Kenneth’s hard work we have the numbers to prove that the system is superior at quickly building strength and explosiveness.”

Kenneth Riggberger

• Elite athlete in track & field, basketball, and European handball. Decathlete on Swedish national team 1972–1982.
• Track and field coach and trainer whose athletes have won 275 Swedish championship medals, including 100 gold.
• Track & field head coach in Swedish and World Championships, 1996 Olympics.
• Strength and conditioning coach for national teams in tennis, bandy, table tennis, goalball, and sled hockey.
• Lecturer in training and sports performance at Swedish Sports Federation and multiple universities.
• Has performed more than 10,000 tests on elite athletes.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

By Chris Korfist

While I was on my waterskiing vacation at White Birch Lodge in Elk Rapids, Michigan, Christopher asked me to write an article about books that were significant signposts along the road of my coaching education, sources of information that helped me become the coach I am today. It sounded easy enough. I believe reading books is part of our journey.

I have shelves full of books from which I could grab a handful of titles and write why they were important.

You are today who you’ll be in five years except for the people you meet and the books you read.
Click To Tweet

But during the drive from northern Michigan to Chicago, I heard Judd Apatow’s interview on Gilbert Gottfried’s podcast. He talked about the importance of the timing of events. To be more specific, certain ideas will be more relevant depending on your frame of mind. This is so much more relevant than a simple list. A simple list is worthless without a personal context for each book.

So, what follows are major chronological mile markers from the last 24 years of my career. They are important to me because they caused a change in my direction as a coach, usually in conjunction with a person or idea I had been working with. After all, as motivational speaker Charlie “Tremendous” Jones points out, “You are today who you’ll be in five years except for the people you meet and the books you read.”

A Beginner’s Mind, A Zen Mind — Shunryu Suzuki and Trudy Dixon

My first professional mentor, Dr. Phil Claussen, recommended this book. He had been the strength coach for the Cubs and White Sox before it was even an official position. Now he serves as strength coach for the Bahamas Olympic teams. He said this book would open my mind to new ideas. I was raised in the Nebraska/NSCA world of training and defended it with vigor. This book taught me to read and learn with a “kindergartner’s mind”: Learn without any personal baggage. Without this concept, I never would have ventured into trying new things or have had the honesty to say that something didn’t work and move on.

Westside Barbell Blue Book — Louie Simmons

Dr. Claussen also encouraged me to mine Powerlifting USA magazine for people with different ideas. Remember, this was the pre-internet era. Coaches ran ads in the classifieds at the back of the magazine to sell their ideas. Louie Simmons ran an ad to come out to Westside Barbell in Columbus, Ohio. So to learn more, I went there for three days. It was a great experience as I was surrounded by some of the most open, friendly, and giving people. Dave Tate was especially very helpful and friendly. At the end of the experience, Louie gave me a shirt and a blue book with all of his articles from Powerlifting USA. I must have read it 20 times since then. He is a guy who exemplified a kindergartener’s mind. What especially stuck out was his creation and evolution of a system. Louie studied hard, learned from people outside his field, implemented and tested new ideas, and created an evolving system. This was the framework I needed to build my own system.

Napoleon’s Maxims of War — Napoleon

I have always been interested in Napoleonic history and have read extensively on the subject during my college days and ever since then. In my reading, I realized the profound change Napoleon created in the way he waged war. He understood that cost was not a factor in winning. A quote like, “If you ask how much it costs to fight a war, you will lose,” or his comment to Prince Metternich of Austria, “You cannot stop me, I spend 30,000 lives a month,” made me realize that he won because he sacrificed more than anyone else. Total commitment to a cause. In his case, to change the world. In mine, to see if I can get someone to run faster.

The Sports Book — DB Hammer, and correspondence

My journey arrived at a point where I realized there was much more to running faster than just squatting more. There was a huge neural component. My counterpart in Rochester, NY, Dan Fichter agreed. As we scoured message boards for information, Dan stumbled onto DB Hammer. We saw that he had written a book and we bought it. It was what we were looking for, tying neural components into training. So we decided to reach out to this individual when he offered to build programs. Hundreds of pages of email exchanges between the three of us looked at different aspects of training, building programs, exercises, theory, and philosophy. These emails remain as an incredible source of information. I missed some of the stuff back then because I wasn’t ready for the knowledge. I always go back and find fresh info and ideas now that my knowledge and experience have progressed.

The Talent Code — Daniel Coyle

This is a good book that shows many important aspects of creating environments and building champions. Sorry, no back story here. I just stumbled onto it when I was looking for a book on tape during a long drive.

Running — Frans Bosch

After I bought the book and accompanying DVD, I didn’t think much of the information so I put them away for a year. This was also a time when Dr. Shawn Allen of the Gait Guys and I were working hard on unraveling some of the secrets of sprinting. We met every Thursday to study film and play with different ideas we had. After a year of this intensive study with a brilliant mind, I saw the Bosch DVD on the shelf and looked at it again. I was floored. I grabbed the book and destroyed it with notes, questions, and ideas. I decided to reach out to Frans and offered to pay for his time by asking questions about breaking down film and dealing with the various mechanical issues runners face. He obliged and another email trove resulted. Running is the best book on the market for running.

Triphasic Training — Cal Dietz

I stumbled onto this one too. I try to buy everything new and see if I can get one idea out of it. This book is a treasure trove. It synthesizes the best research from all over the world and applies it so the everyday coach/athlete can train easily. This is the best book on the market on training athletes in the weight room. It currently forms the basis of all of my lifting.

The Wright Brothers — David McCullough

Orville and Wilbur are my inspiration. Working from their garage, they accomplished what was thought to be impossible. It started with a letter to the Smithsonian and ended at Kitty Hawk.

Please share this article so others may benefits.

By Dr. Denny Kolkebeck, DPT, CSCS

Not too long ago, it was common to have kids who played football, basketball, and baseball; athletes who played soccer, swam, and ran track and field. They weren’t outliers or mavericks who eschewed formalized clubs and traveling teams that played year around, just athletes who possessed athleticism and a desire to express it every way they could.

Somewhere along the road, the “norm” became athletes choosing (or being cajoled into?) a single sport with a season that not only entails their school season, but nearly year-round participation in travel and club teams.

This growing trend hasn’t gone unnoticed. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) committee on sports and fitness has stated:

There appear to be increasing numbers of children who specialize in a sport at an early age, train year-round for a sport, and compete on an “elite” level. The lure of a college scholarship or a professional career can motivate athletes (and their parents) to commit to specialized training regimens at an early age.

Sometimes less is more… especially in the early stages of development.
Click To Tweet

The low probability of reaching these lofty goals does not appear to discourage many aspirants. To be competitive at a high level requires training regimens for children that could be considered extreme even for adults.

The ever-increasing requirements for success create a constant pressure for athletes to train longer, harder, more intelligently, and, in some cases, at an earlier age.

While it is natural and advantageous to have a competitive spirit and desire to maximize God-given ability, the growing trend of specialization to achieve these goals may have some negative results.

The Dark Side of Youth Sports

Loyola University Medical Center recently released the results of their study titled, “The Risks of Sports Specialization and Rapid Growth in Young Athletes.” The authors found two relationships among injured vs. non-injured athletes:

• the injured athletes spent more hours per week playing sports (19.8 hrs/wk vs. 17 hrs/wk)
• the injured athletes also spent more hours per week in organized sports (11 hrs/wk vs. 8.8 hrs/wk).

Among the injured athletes, 60.4% were considered “highly specialized” according to the study’s six-point sports-specialization score:

• Trains more than 75% of time in one sport
• Trains to improve skill or misses time with friends
• Has quit other sports to focus on one sport
• Considers one sport more important than others
• Regularly travels out of state
• Trains more than eight months a year, or competes more than six months

On the six-point scale, the average score of uninjured athletes was 2.75, while the average score of injured athletes was 3.49 (a score of 3 or more was considered specialized).

The lead investigator, Dr. Neeru Jayanthi said while the current study is preliminary, “We should be cautious about intense specialization in one sport before and during adolescence. Parents should consider enrolling their children in multiple sports.”

While a competitive spirit is natural, the growing trend of specialization to may have some negative results.
Click To Tweet

The AAP’s report, “Overuse Injuries, Overtraining, and Burnout in Child and Adolescent Athletes” found 50% of all injuries seen in pediatric sports medicine are related to overuse—the cumulative micro-trauma to a muscle, joint, bone, or tendon under constant unvarying stress without adequate recovery time.

The AAP’s report suggested the following to avoid overtraining and potential overuse injuries:

• Limit one sporting activity to five days/week
• One day off from all organized physical activities/week
• 2-3 months off from organized sport per year to engage in strength and conditioning and to refresh the mind and let lingering injuries heal

The report also spoke to the risk of burnout among younger athletes, which is an interaction of physiological, psychological and hormonal changes that result in altered performance. Common signs and symptoms include:

• Chronic muscle or joint pain
• Personality changes
• Elevated resting heart rate

Younger athletes may also experience:

• Fatigue
• Lack of enthusiasm for practice and games
• Difficulty with completing routine tasks

Variety is the Spice of Life

The benefits of younger athletes competing in multiple sports was reinforced in the concluding remarks made in the AAP’s report:

Well-rounded, multisport athletes have the highest potential to achieve the goal of lifelong fitness and enjoyment of physical activity while avoiding some of the pitfalls of overuse, overtraining, and burnout, provided that they participate in moderation and are in tune with their bodies for signs of overuse or fatigue.

Athletes exposed to numerous sports also have an opportunity to grow their total athleticism—imagine baking a bigger pizza which then yields bigger slices; improve underlying multi-directional mobility and stability in muscles and joints; develop and expand conditioning levels and express themselves physically and emotionally in different ways.

Input from Elite Coaches

Some college coaches also see the value in athletes playing more than one sport. In an interview, LSU football coach Les Miles said: “I’ve always enjoyed those guys that play all kinds of sports, all times of the year. They love to compete. There are some greater characteristics to those guys than there are with one-sport guys.”

When ESPN asked Virginia lacrosse coach Dom Starsia whether he preferred athletes to focus on one sport or multiple sports he replied:

It’s not a requirement to play multiple sports, but way more often than not our guys are multi-sport athletes and the best athletes at their school. They are competitive kids who do not want to sit around while other sports are being played.

I am always saying, ‘You learn to play lacrosse team defense and team offense on a football field, a soccer field, a basketball court,’ etc… I wince when a young athlete tells me that he is giving up football to concentrate on lacrosse. There is nothing you can do on your own that would be of greater advantage to your athletic development as a lacrosse player than going to football practice every day.

Former USC football Pete Carroll (currently the Seattle Seahawks head coach) once said, “I want guys that are so special athletically, so competitive that they can compete in more than one sport here at USC. It’s really important that guys are well-rounded and just have this tendency for competitiveness that they have to express somewhere.”

According to the article, Multisport Athletics: Why it pays not to specialize, over 80% of NCAA recruits did not specialize in high school. In the same article, professional basketball trainer Brian McCormick notes, “Cross-training through a wide spectrum of sports will enable teen athletes to experience multilateral development and increase their skills for success across the board of athletics.

In the book, The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance, an interesting study was shared illustrating the difference in the average number of hours in practice per week “near-elite” and “elite” players spent during their early life.

The study found athletes who averaged fewer hours per week in formal practices until around their 15th birthday, had a better chance of becoming an elite athlete compared to those who practiced more before their 15th year.

Sometimes less is more… especially in the early stages of development.

Follow the Leaders

Numerous professional athletes have benefitted from playing multiple sports before making their presence known on the world stage:

• Soccer great Mia Hamm played football, basketball and baseball when growing up.
• Basketball star LeBron James played high school football.
• New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady was drafted by the Montreal Expos to play catcher before taking a football scholarship to Michigan.
• Bo Jackson and Deion Sanders both played professional football and baseball.
• 1980’s tennis star Bjorn Borg, who won 11 Grand Slam titles, played a multitude of sports and didn’t specialize in tennis until he was 16 years old.
• Basketball great Steve Nash played soccer in his early years and didn’t start playing basketball until he was 12 years old.
• In Jamaica, runners like Usain Bolt don’t start intense or specific training programs until their later high school years.

Slow Cooker Approach

Ultimately, the decision when and if to either specialize in one sport or play several comes down to parents, athletes and coaches collaborating to decide what is in the long-term best interests of the athlete.

The good news for younger athletes—especially under 12 years old—is time is on your side to get better; it’s not too late to start a new sport.

Coaches working with student-athletes would be doing them an immeasurable favor by adopting a “slow cook” approach to developing their skills and facilitating a “progress, not perfection” mindset. Encouraging athletes to take time-off and to play other sports would also be in coaches’ best interests since a mentally fresh and athletically diverse player yields better team results.

Plant seeds to bear harvest when it matters.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

Bibliography

Brenner, J. (2007). Overuse Injuries, Overtraining, and Burnout in Child and Adolescent Athletes. Pediatrics, 119, 1242-1245.

Committee on Sports Medicine and Fitness. (2000). Intensive Training and Sports Specialization in Young Athletes. Pediatrics, 106, 154-157.

ESPN. (2010, Aug). Championship coach, Dom Starsia wants you to play other sports. Retrieved July 27, 2011, from League Athletics LLC and Braintree Lacrosse.

Epstein, David J. The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance. New York: Current, 2014. Print.

Hale, J. (2010, April 4). Multi-Sport Athletes: Why It Pays Not to Specialize. Retrieved Aug 6, 2011, from High Skool Kronicles.

Jayanthi, N., Pinkham, C., & Luke, A. (2011). The Risks of Sports Specialization and Rapid Growth in Young Athletes. 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine. April 30th-May4th, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Johnson, J. (2008). Overuse Injuries in Young Athletes: Cause and Prevention. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 30, 27-31.

Meana, R. (2005, May 26). Youth Soccer’s Dilemma: Is more actually better? (New Jersey Youth Soccer) Retrieved July 25, 2011, from New Jersey Youth Soccer Website.

STOP Sports Injuries Campaign. (2010, April 1). Young Athletes Overuse Their Bodies and Strike Out Too Early. Retrieved Aug 4, 2011, from American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons:

The Associated Press. (2011, May 19). Two-sport athletes flourish at LSU. Retrieved July 29, 2011, from New Orlean Net LLC Website.

By Carl Valle

In my previous article on the value of maximal speed development, I argued the case for quality as a foundation. In this article, I will share how to do it properly, as most coaches and athletes simply measure Top Speed or Maximal Velocity. Down the road, coaches want to know about training maximal velocity (loading and planning) and coaching (instruction). Before we jump the gun, let’s make sure we know what we are dealing with.

Definitions of Absolute Maximal Velocity versus Submaximal Velocity

If you ask athletes how fast they are, the answer is likely to vary by sport and background. American football players will share their 40-yard dash time, sprinters their best 100m (with or without wind), and pro soccer players the speed they reached in a game in kilometers per hour. So the best way to assess max velocity is to get specific about what trying to run as fast as possible really means.

Short sprints are acceleration tests, and a mile run is an endurance test. Yet some coaches evaluate player speed by using the wrong distance and testing setup. Even if coaches follow the guidelines in this article, they are not evaluating maximal velocity because anytime one tests in training, they are only getting a glimpse of potential. The timing of the season means coaches are likely not getting someone’s best absolute time, as would happen in a race, so they must understand that their athletes are not displaying absolute abilities.

Submaximal velocity simply refers to practice times, but you should never use that term with athletes. Or if you are an athlete, don’t think about personal bests in training. Some coaches and athletes extrapolate by using practice times to predict what one can do, and that is possible. But the best way to look at it is simply trying to get better each year through a good training program, rather than artificially improving testing by chasing numbers.

Requirements of a Maximal Velocity Test

Team sports can use a shorter sprint to get maximum speed. While 40m is a good start, you need 70m for a full-out evaluation. Use the distance you need, but 20m run-ups are not cutting it.

The first step in setting up a true speed test is to appreciate that you need enough distance to measure an athlete’s maximal velocity. Time after time I watch coaches use timing gates or cameras to time speed, yet they don’t measure the required acceleration zone or standardize the process. The most important quality of a test is that it can be repeated, with the setup as similar procedurally as possible each time. I am horrified when major programs don’t replicate seasonal testing properly. If not, the data is nearly useless because it’s lost the opportunity for year-to-year comparisons of an athlete’s ability. The truth is that a good maximal velocity test is not difficult to perform. Here are the requirements:

You must have enough runway – Use an 80m straightaway or longer. While athletes may claim they will run through a brick wall for their coach, that never happens. Subconsciously, athletes can’t hit true maximal effort when they face a cement wall. To test speed, you need acceleration distance, a maximal velocity zone, and enough room to safely decelerate. Having plenty of space removes inhibitions or tightness. Also, ensure that the sprint zone is not in the middle of a high-traffic area where people are walking back and forth. Set up cones and have someone enforce the safety of the athletes at all times.

Measure segments carefully – I always bring a tape measure and mark off 10m segments. Some facilities allow you to add permanent marks for convenience, but in most cases you will have to measure each zone over and over again. 10y marks are easier for American football because the field and hurdle intervals are readily measured and labeled. Coaches should measure 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70 segments to capture maximal velocity. You need to know terminal acceleration and initial deceleration to measure the athlete’s full speed. Most athletes in team sports hit maximal velocity around 40-50m if they are fast and properly trained. Elite sprinters hit it about 10 meters later. Remember that practice is a different beast, and some athletes only bring out their top speed at meets or games. Coaches, therefore, need to look for improvements in testing over time, not necessarily if their athletes are hitting their best times at those zones.

Record all conditions of the day – The most obvious record for outdoor testing conditions is weather, but similar information should be included for indoor facilities. Athletes arriving late from a snowstorm will be a distraction, or a damp area can spook athletes. In addition to the environment, have a short checklist of feedback questions for the athletes. If you monitor physiological conditions, look at the trends before and after the session for a better perspective. Some coaches use extensive muscle and nervous system readiness, and a few subjective statements from advanced athletes is a good idea.

Testing the Athletes

Administrating the testing process is hard because you need instant feedback to ramp up the speed incrementally. Athletes may take 4-5 sprints to hit top speed though some may hit it earlier. That is fine. You need considerable management to keep athletes from fatiguing by trying to do something more than just run fast. Top speed is strange since once an athlete hits close to maximal velocity, the sensation of not accelerating can be strange or foreign even for experienced sprinters. Think about being on a plane cruising at 500 miles per hour. It’s fast but doesn’t feel like anything. Instant feedback of speed and visual clues can help throttle up effort, especially in the acceleration phase. Many athletes forget that top speed isn’t about running upright, it’s about powering out smoothly to carry momentum through the zone.

Without times, even athletes who are aware of their body in time and space are not perfect, so one has to provide times. Some athletes relax so much they look like noodles and run slow while others consciously try to relax and tighten up instead. It’s a learning, training, and evaluation process that must be repeated for maximum effectiveness.

Where am I going with this? You might think that setting up cones and lining up athletes is a no-brainer but even the basics are harder than I once thought. The reason? Besides running one person at a time and getting times on a clipboard, it is difficult to know if someone is, in fact, running maximally unless they are getting splits.

Breaking Down Performance Analysis After Timing

I have done speed testing of athletes for years and like the idea of filming in conjunction with timing gates. Having only one data set (video or velocity) tells just one part of the story, so investing in both is wise. The problem is not the availability of technology; it’s availability of expertise and experience to ensure the accuracy of video information. Too often I see coaches with smartphones thinking they are biomechanics experts just because they have a camera. Drawing shapes on a tablet without best practices and quality data is no different than a toddler finger painting.

The obvious need is to get the fastest 10m split and use that as a benchmark and goal for improvement. Team sports like to convert the split into running speed, and that is fine. See chart below for easy conversion.

100-meter splits converted to running speed.

Breaking down splits is easy with Freelap as the work is automated, but coaches worth their salt want to know why instead of just getting raw data. I have written about the Key Performance Indicators in Hurdling for SpeedEndurance, but sprinting is very straightforward. Coaches can break down video into an array of metrics. I prefer starting large, then zeroing into smaller details. Stride parameters are reactions to speed development and not things one can adjust as they are resultant metrics, but it’s good to study them to ensure the body is functioning mechanically.

Stride frequency – The first parameter is stride frequency. The goal in analysis is not to tinker with taking faster steps, but to determine the natural rate of steps in a fly during a career. Stride frequency increases by barely perceptual margins, so a 10.20 to 10 sprinter will make changes of a quarter-step at best. With contact times of about a tenth of a second, we are talking how a hundredth alone over a course of 100m can dramatically change performance. Film at 1200 frames per second can see this, but the goal is to see changes over the course of years, not individual sessions.

Stride length – Since fly sprint distances are base 10m, you can take the frequency of the segment on video and estimate the length of each stride. You are likely to get a range from 2–2.3m, and the goal is to ensure the stride length demonstrates a relationship between body height and leg length. Like frequency, the result of the stride length is a product of speed and power, except when an athlete is severely restricted. Profiling athletes’ maximum performance speed-wise and seeing how they run provide baseline running parameters.

Mechanical Factors to look for

Harmony – While no metric exists here, you first need to see it live and then compare slow-motion later. Trust your eyes but measure to see if it’s worth addressing. Treat the athlete like a piece of art and don’t be too technical, just see if anything jumps out at you. I like to examine facial expressions but don’t try to read too much. Some aggressive athletes do great with relaxation while a trance or sleepy face at high speed shows confidence and comfort—key factors in running fast.

Arm carriage metrics – Coaches may see the arms as parts of the equation that don’t provide much to the sprint cycle. While that may be true, I have yet to see a world-class sprinter with lousy arm action. Arm action mirrors leg action. Because the body wants to be synchronized, it’s important to see if the volitional efforts are allowing for good running or ruining potential. Arm action is a reflection of the free leg swing during recovery, so check the distance and height of the hand away from the head for balance. A relationship exists between the arm action and stride length and frequency, but it’s more of a reaction to good sprinting and can’t be cued or trained. The humerus and femur are coordinated because of anatomy, so review those positions first. Don’t copy other sprinters too much since builds and limb lengths are not the same. With high-speed film, look at ground contact times and oscillation of the head and arm swing. The dead spot or switch time between pulling and relaxing is less than .001, showing how amazing the body is.

Posture metrics – Measuring posture isn’t easy, as individuals have anatomical and style variables. A good idea is to see a general tall position cycling between a lean and true vertical. As triple extension is a bit of a myth, tall running the entire distance is too rigid and artificial. Core training strengthens and improves the function of the body, so put more coordination into it. Having the head directly above the pelvis during the stride cycle is fleeting, but it’s a milestone.

Leg action metrics – Knee height and hip extension distance are common subjects in the world of track and field. But the hip positions Ralph Mann speaks of don’t apply as well to other sports, especially soccer. Mann’s data is fairly accurate with elite sprinters though the kinematic data is a chicken-and-egg thing with elite power and talent. What one sees on the screen is due to being fast, not the reason they are achieving those positions and angles. Heel recovery should be minimal on the butt kicking, or how far the knee and heel are from the pelvis with backside mechanics. Front side mechanics is more of a relationship of keeping the pelvis in control, rather than doing hip flexor exercises or drills. Athletes with excessive backside mechanics need to do more running and always see if this problem is symptomatic of restrictions or injuries. Some natural lordosis will increase excessive backside mechanics but does so by losing head position.

The Master Checklist

I hate doing cheat sheets or similar lists, and I prefer that people make their own. But since I have finally developed one, it’s selfish not to share. Here are the six mandatory elements of doing a fly test.

1. Fresh athletes – Injury risk increases when doing any maximal sprinting work, so a small unloading of volume and intensity makes testing safer. No guarantees, though, since fast sprints—even when rested—are not a ticket to injury-free running. Make sure your athletes thoroughly warm up and manage any who have lingering issues. I have a binary decision-making approach: either you can sprint, and it’s wise to do so, or you can’t and the risk isn’t worth it. Alternate workouts and going a little harder in the weight room are good secondary options when athletes aren’t ready.
2. Facilities/equipment ready – Even if you are the track coach, the track is not yours. It belongs to the organization or school, and this can be frustrating if an outside event pops up randomly. I have been in a situation when the governor visited with little advance notice. The track was shut down after I had waited for weeks to have a hard workout. So be sure to coordinate with everyone, not just the athletic staff. Also, make sure you count and prepare every cone, table, and necessary piece of equipment. I now keep my own equipment in my car. I have organized things the night before and laid everything out, only to discover that a morning conditioning program had taken items I had purchased.
3. Pro system and cameras fully charged – I always charge everything for 12 hours the night before. While you can plug equipment into walls and computers, I don’t like being without a backup plan for juice.
4. Video back-up prepared – Coaches need four small cones on average to create visual reference points. Due to the parallax of the camera, line up the video, so the middle of the fly segment is targeted and zoom in from a long vantage point to improve the accuracy of the visual data. In five years with Freelap, I have missed two splits. That’s less than one percent of one percent, but always have a backup option as it makes things fail-safe.
5. Managers and support organized – People are essential to technology. While great protocols and procedures are important, experienced and energetic support makes or breaks things. Sometimes it’s a grind to get a large group properly warmed up and trained, so make sure you have help. Much of coaching is crowd control. If everyone involved sticks to their job, things will run much smoother.
6. Be in party mode – Make sure the process is fun and rewarding. Timing of any sporting event is a test, but it shouldn’t feel like taking the SATs or going to the dentist to pull out a tooth. Make it fun while keeping things focused and goal-oriented. Athletes getting tested with electronic timing or having a dedicated coach doing video and technique breakdown should feel special, yet still give their undivided attention to the process.

Other details are more individual to the program, but I have hand-timed in high school and filmed in college, and it was a burden. While hand times gave instant feedback, I hated giving the data out and filming with a chronometer is slow. While I have moved on from counting frames to measuring points with an iPad, instantly organized splits are a dream come true. I have tested entire teams and from warm-up to finish I was done in about an hour. After 30-40 minutes of preparation, 20 minutes of pure sprints should get 15 athletes tested three times.

Parting Thoughts on Maximal Velocity Evaluation

It’s not shocking that I don’t often do max testing. Pure all-out sprinting is taxing, and with long competition schedules it’s hard to fit in. Still, even if you do maximal velocity testing only a few times a year, you will 10-12 data points of how you athletes’ abilities are improving over the period of an Olympic cycle. The speed or time split is not a number that means one will break a world record or even extrapolate perfectly to better performances, but it is the best option to determine if they are improving their core abilities.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

By Simon Wegerif, Director, HRV Fit Ltd

Here at ithlete, we enjoyed Andrew Flatt’s recent blog post regarding the interpretation of HRV trends in athletes. This article complements Andrew’s work by showing exactly how you can apply HRV to training using ithlete.

Introducing ithlete

Following almost a year of research, founder Simon Wegerif introduced ithlete in 2009 . His goal was to take HRV measurement out of the lab and put it into the hands of athletes so they could benefit from an easy-to-use barometer of fatigue and recovery. Six years later, ithlete is not only the leading HRV app but also the only one scientifically validated. This revolutionary training app allows you to personalize your training program based on a simple one-minute measurement.

Andrew’s article discussed how to use the InRMSSD HRV parameter to measure HRV. He highlighted several reasons why lnRMSSD appears to be the preferred HRV parameter for monitoring. One is that it can be assessed in just 60 seconds. Another is that it is less influenced by breathing rate, making it more suitable for field usage than, for instance, HF power.

ithlete uses a patented formula to provide a more intuitive and easily interpretable figure for non-expert users. The value you get from the app is the natural log-transformed RMSSD multiplied by 20 (lnRMSSDx20). It gets no simpler than the color-coded training recommendation feature, displayed after you’ve taken your one-minute measurement. These recommendations let you adjust your daily training or perfect your taper before a major race or competition.

Here is what colors are telling you:

Green – Within the normal range from your personal baseline, an indication of an ideal time to train.

Amber – Below your normal range, so you need to train cautiously with lower intensity or volume. HRV will typically show changes before performance starts to drop and thereby serve as an early warning sign of fatigue accumulation. It’s a common misconception to expect a drop in performance here based on a lower HRV score. This is not always the case, and may, for example, merely signal anxiety on the day of a competition.

Red – While uncommon, red should be taken seriously. Either take a guilt-free rest day or do low-intensity exercises, yoga, or light swimming—all of which speed recovery.

Figure 1: ithlete normal range.

Daily ithlete readings indicate how well recovered and ready for physical strain your body is. Once you give the body training loads it can cope with, your training effectiveness will improve, and you may see a decline in day-to-day HRV variation. Ultimately you will stop losing time to non-functional overreaching (NFOR), related illnesses (such as coughs and colds), or unproductive sessions.

Sometimes a high HRV score can appear red. As Andrew pointed out, high HRV is not always good. Although research in this area is not as clear as it is for low HRV, high HRV (or a rapid upward trend over several days) can signal adrenal fatigue and even exhaustion. Progression toward, and recovery from, this state will often go via low HRV. This progression may seem confusing but is consistent with theories about how the body deals with increasing levels of stress and challenge in the environment, ultimately trying to prevent further damage.

The ithlete app has multiple features. It enables you to track daily, weekly, and monthly changes in your HRV score. Of course, every individual is different, so the most important figure to look for is the change from your personal baseline. An upward trend over time indicates an increasing fitness level and is more important than the absolute scores.

Figure 2: ithlete sleep chart.

Using the dashboard to view your HRV scores and baseline over time at a glance is another way to interpret your data. Simply turn the device to landscape to view the interactive chart allowing you to investigate the relationship between HRV, training load, and subjective feelings. The ithlete app allows you to record your subjective metrics to build a picture of health and fitness. Tracking those subjective indicators (sleep, fatigue, muscle soreness, stress level, mood, and diet) using built-in sliding scales makes it easier to recognize trends and patterns in the body’s response to behavior.

ithlete Pro

ithlete Pro is ideal for the user who values the data garnered via the ithlete mobile app and wants to extract greater insight from the daily readings. Its Training Guide provides a unique pictorial representation of the user’s energy and recovery states as well as individualized zones, allowing the user to choose the most suitable training on that particular day. It also interprets each new reading and delivers advice in a single straightforward sentence.

The Training Guide chart is marked in zones to help you decide on the best kind of training, based on your current state. Andrew Flatt described the most common response to overload training: a progressive decrease in your HRV, followed by an increase in resting heart rate. This is your typical alarm response to a stressor, activating the sympathetic arm of the autonomic nervous system. The fight-or-flight response is only meant to be activated for a short time, and chronic activation leads to stress. ithlete Pro will show it in the top left quadrant of the Training Guide.

Figure 3: ithlete HRV Trend.

Andrew also observed that an increasing HRV trend throughout training is not always a good thing and thus should not always be interpreted as such. ithlete Pro will measure your HRV and indicate it in the bottom right quadrant. Activation level progressively reduces, so you might not feel sufficiently energized to perform intensive reps, and at the extreme bottom it’s likely you would feel little energy or enthusiasm. If this situation persists for several days, it can eventually become adrenal fatigue—which requires rest and special attention to your diet to recover quickly.

Figure 4: ithlete energy levels lower than normal.

ithlete Pro also includes a fully configurable timeline chart for HRV, resting heart rate, training load, and subjective data, enabling better insight into the lifestyle factors with the greatest impact on performance and recovery.

Figure 5: ithlete data visualizaton.

Selecting one or more of your subjective data points (sleep, fatigue, muscle soreness, stress, mood, and diet), makes it easy to visualize patterns and relationships. For example, you might display training load, diet, and HRV to investigate if your eating habits are responsive to training load and what impact the two have on HRV and recovery. Another example might be to show just sleep, fatigue, training loads and the HRV rolling average to see how long it takes you to recover, as well as how tired your training is making you feel. This type of information can be hugely helpful. It is much easier to control a trend or habit when you become aware of it.

For those of you who are coaches or team sports scientists, the ithlete Team App provides a single destination for viewing and managing team data. It resides in the Cloud (powered by Amazon Web Services) making it secure and accessible any time of the day.

Figure 6: ithlete Team App.

The dashboard provides coaches with a snapshot of player stats. The top level gives a percentage of players who have uploaded a measurement that day. What about those who haven’t? No problem. The built-in SMS feature sends reminders and feedback. You can then look into your team’s readings. These readings include daily recommendations, heart rate (HR), HRV, HRV change, subjective scores, and training load (often expressed as RPE).

Coaches have to manage various demands, whether it is keeping a squad of players fit throughout a season or balancing demands of elite players across multiple competitions. The ithlete Team App enables you to record and monitor players’ HRV and training load throughout the season, identifying and responding quickly to trends. If a player is getting fatigued after a long run of games, ithlete will quickly identify this situation before any other symptoms are present—thereby allowing coaches to incorporate additional rest and recovery time into the program. The variable time view on the graph allows you to analyze 1, 3, 6 or 12 months of data at any time before zooming in on a user-defined period.

Conclusion

Using your HRV score alone to assess training status can prove challenging. Training with ithlete allows you to observe HRV changes in context by recording your subjective data and training loads. This data provides a comprehensive picture of your training regimen.

We know it’s difficult to adjust training or lifestyle factors based solely on one parameter. Here at ithlete, we’ve removed the need for guesswork or complex calculations from your training schedule. Using the training recommendations in our Training Guide exclusive to ithlete Pro is the best thing you can do to make your training safe and effective. Everything we put into the ithlete, Pro, and Team apps is scientifically validated. This is why we are the leading scientifically founded sports app in HRV measurement. We are ithlete.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

References

Validity of the ithlete^TM Smart Phone Application for Determining Ultra-Short-Term Heart Rate Variability by Andrew A. Flatt1, Michael R. Esco. Journal of Human Kinetics volume 39/2013, 85-92 DOI:10.2478/hukin-2013-0071

Smartphone-enabled pulse rate variability: An alternative methodology for the collection of heart rate variability in psychophysiological research James A.J. Heathers International Journal of Psychophysiology Volume 89, Issue 3, September 2013, Pages 297–304

The impact of breathing on HRV measurements: Implications for the longitudinal follow-up of athletes. Damien Saboul, Vincent Pialoux & Christophe Hautier. European Journal of Sport Science Volume 13, Issue 5, 2013

Ultra-Short-Term Heart Rate Variability Indexes at Rest and Post-Exercise in Athletes: Evaluating the Agreement with Accepted Recommendations. Michael R. Esco, Andrew A. Flatt Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2014) 13, 535 – 541

Training Adaptation and Heart Rate Variability in Elite Endurance Athletes: Opening the Door to Effective Monitoring Daniel J. Plews, Paul B. Laursen, Jamie Stanley, Andrew E. Kilding, Martin Buchheit Sports Medicine September 2013, Volume 43, Issue 9, pp 773-781

Autonomic adaptations to intensive and overload training periods: a laboratory study. Vincent Pichot et al, MSSE 2002 DOI: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000035993.08625.31

Evaluating individual training adaptation with Smartphone-derived heart rate variability in a collegiate female soccer team. Flatt, Andrew A.; Esco, Michael R. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: Post Acceptance: July 11, 2015 doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001095

Cornforth, D., Campbell, P., Nesbitt, K., Robinson, D. and Jelinek, H.F. (2015) ‘Prediction of game performance in Australian football using heart rate variability measures’, Int. J. Signal and Imaging Systems Engineering, Vol. 8, Nos. 1/2, pp.80–88.

US patent 8666482 Method, system and software product for the measurement of heart rate variability. Simon C Wegerif.

By Mario Gomez

In 2011, junior Brandon Moss won the Texas 4A Region 1 track meet and set the Chapin High School triple jump record with a massive leap of 48′-2″. The victory earned him a ticket to Austin for the 4A state championship meet two weeks later. The 2nd and 3rd place medalists also qualified.

The results were much different at State. The two athletes Brandon had outperformed at regionals placed ahead of him. Brandon walked away with a 4th place finish (47′-1.75″), while John Warren of Killeen jumped 48′-4″ to earn silver and Shakiel Randolph of Waco Midway bounded his way to bronze (48′-1″).

I remember agonizing over the results. On each of his six attempts, Brandon was as much as 18 inches behind the board even though he had practiced running through the board numerous times during the weeks leading up to State. I was dumbfounded and couldn’t find the words to console Brandon. It might have been nerves, the stage, or overconfidence. We vowed to fix the problem and return to State his senior year and medal.

Stance Setup

Too often I see high school athletes trying to emulate elite jumpers. Some walk or skip into their approach. Others place their feet parallel to each other and simulate a “waterfall” start. Still others put on a theatric performance filled with entertaining hand movements, confusing foot placements, and clapping. Unfortunately, all these methods lead to an inconsistent drive phase that decreases the likelihood of a consistent approach.

All our jumpers begin with their power leg/foot forward, so they have an even number of steps. It is easy for them to remember, and it makes our life as coaches that much simpler. We typically have several athletes jumping simultaneously at meets. If you ask each one, “What leg do you jump off of?” as I have observed many coaches do, it will drive you crazy by season’s end.

Figure 1: Crouch Start

In the crouch start, the athlete places his back foot 8-12 inches behind his power leg for a balanced and consistent base. He leans over from his waist, placing his chest near his power leg thigh. We cue the athlete to “bring chest to thigh and nose to knee.” The power-leg knee is over the front toe, resulting in the shins being inclined and the hips higher than the head. The hips should be placed above (vertically) the space created by the two feet. The majority of weight is on the front foot, although some weight should remain on the back foot as well. The front toe should remain on the ground, and the back heel is off the ground. Finally, the arms are in alternated positions with the one opposite the front leg forward.

Figure 2: Roll-Over Start.

In the rollover start, the athlete’s feet remain in the same positions as the crouch start, but the upper body is tilted back. In this position, the front toe is off the ground and pointing up (dorsiflexed), with the back heel on the ground. The arms are alternated, with the one opposite the front foot raised high overhead. The athlete initiates the rollover by bending at the waist and creating a position similar to the crouch start. However, it is extremely important to note that the athlete should bend at the waist FIRST as he brings his chest to the thigh before the front toe touches the track or the back heel leaves the ground. If the athlete moves his knee over his front toe and back heel off the ground before bending at the waist, he most likely will stumble from the start.

The Drive Phase

The first four to six steps of the approach determine either success or inconsistency at the board. The majority of high school jumpers lack consistency at the board primarily because of an unpredictable drive phase. I constantly hear coaches telling their jumpers to move two feet back or two feet forward without first having checked out the accuracy of the athlete’s first four to six steps. Those athletes will move forward and hit the same mark as before, or even worse, be over the board by an entire stride.

Check the drive phase first. I’ve attended several conferences where college coaches have suggested establishing a checkmark for jumpers. This definitely works for full-time jumpers or if you work exclusively with a few athletes, but the majority of high school athletes also run individual sprints and relays. I work with many jumpers at the same time, so trying to establish a check mark for each of them seems tiresome and unreliable.

However, if an athlete is having difficulty getting on the board at a meet, the first issue I address is the drive phase. I immediately check the athlete’s 4th or 6th overall step and make sure it is consistent. If the drive phase is consistent, the reason he is not hitting the board occurs later. But the majority of the time this check will remedy the situation.

And why wait until the meet? I might have a jumper who has just completed a 4×100 race and must report back to the pit within 10 minutes. He is tired and might also be competing in another field event. I believe in check marks and in fact, they have helped several of my jumpers. But they will only confuse the majority of high school athletes. Use them as needed.

Athletes need to be patient during the drive phase. “Patience” here means they should feel longer timed pushes into the track, resulting in movement up and forward during the initial part of the approach. We want them to be powerful, rather than quick. Quickness does not equal fast.

Jumpers should work on large ranges of motions with their arms, which will allow their legs to work in sync. If they can produce “big arms,” the opposing thigh will work toward the chest in unison, creating greater force application. This will also appear as if the athlete is coming out of blocks, and the coach should see triple extension. This includes the head being aligned with the body and not tucking the chin. Cue the athlete to “split big,” use “powerful pushes,” and continue to reiterate patience.

The Continuation Phase

The middle part of the approach consists of 4-8 steps, depending on the length of the approach. The early part of this phase continues to have some aspects of the drive/acceleration phase. Look for the head to remain in line with the spine and hips. The head, body, and hips gradually unfold into a tall posture during this phase. Once the jumper is upright, he will continue to run faster and approach max velocity. At this point, the jumper has become a sprinter. Therefore, the coach should encourage effective sprinting mechanics. The feet should land directly below the hips and at contact the shins should be at or near 90 degrees.

Because the jumper is using sprinting mechanics during this phase, max velocity sessions, wickets, and/or full-fledged sprinting drills provide an opportunity to coach athletes to work this aspect of the approach. The main point here is that 90 percent of the success of the jump occurs during the approach. Flight, landing, and air mechanics are predetermined based on the approach and takeoff.

Too many jump coaches, I believe, waste time on gimmicks that place the athlete in a high-risk environment. These gimmicks include placing a hurdle near the jumping board to have the athlete get more height and increase knee drive at the end of the long jump approach. Another is placing barriers at specific distances and having triple jumpers bound over them to increase second-phase distances. I’ve often witnessed both of these at high school practices even though height in the long jump and second-phase distance in the triple jump are a result of other factors, not stand-alone causes. You’re better off having your jumpers work on becoming better sprinters, which in turn makes them faster and leads to more successful jumps.

The Final Four Steps

Long Jump: Mention “penultimate step” to an incoming freshman or fast sprinter who wants to try jumping, and they will give you the same look they give a foreign language instructor teaching verb tenses. We call it “p-step”; the kids like it because it sounds cool.
Before getting to the p-step—the last step before takeoff—it is important for athletes to understand that they must continue to sprint at near full-controlled speed. High school jumpers tend to get to the board and freak out. They either try to get faster or come to a screeching halt, thereby destroying the momentum they’ve built up during the approach. You need to make sure they continue sprinting all the way onto the p-step.

During the p-step, the athlete’s hips lower while still maintaining velocity. The p-step lands slightly ahead of the hips and allows the center of mass (hips/torso/head) to move upward and forward. As the p-step foot nears the surface, it should be dorsiflexed, allowing the heel to lead the foot onto the ground. The actual contact on the track will be flat with the entire p-step foot creating a rocking-chair-like movement onto the toe. This rolling movement allows the hips and center of mass to move upward and forward. The athlete should feel the p-step behind him, allowing the toe to remain on the ground and the heel to be slightly off the ground to create a bridged position. During the transition from the foot striking the ground into the bridged position, the hips move forward, and the shin shifts forward and down toward the track.

Video 1. Penultimate step in slow motion.

The takeoff leg should also hit the board in a flat manner and slightly ahead of the center of mass. This means the takeoff foot lands in front of the hips, but not excessively. The jumper should allow the hips to go past the takeoff foot as it pushes down and away from the board.

Triple Jump: The final four steps need to be as close as possible to full sprinting mechanics but in a controlled and relaxed manner. The jumper should continue to land with his foot directly under his hips and maintain a tall and straight posture. Much like the anticipation in the long jump, many jumpers slow down near the board. But this destroys posture and mechanics, leading the jumper to reach for the board and foul because of the excessive front-side mechanics.

Only in the last step should the foot strike slightly ahead of the hips. Again, the jump foot should hit the board in a flat manner and then allow the hips to pass through. The jumper should be cued to be patient on the board by “running through the board” and then pushing off. If the athlete is patient, the height of the first phase of the triple jump will be lower. But rushing onto the board and prematurely jumping creates too much height for an effective first phase.

Number of Steps

How many steps should each jumper take for the approach? There are many proposed guidelines, and the differences are significant, but the number generally falls between 12-22 steps for high school athletes. You can either count every stride your jumper takes to arrive at the board or only the jumping leg. For example, a 12-step approach would be the same as a 6-step approach counting only the power leg.

While all coaches base their approach distance on different aspects, you need to consider the jumper’s training age (how long the athlete has been participating in track and field), speed, strength, and other related factors. The lower the speed and strength of an athlete, the fewer the steps. The reason is simple: the sooner the athlete gets to controlled top speed, the sooner deceleration begins. The key is the amount of time an athlete can sustain his top controlled speed approaching the board. It is important to note, however, that although a high school jumper may be faster, stronger, and have a relatively higher training age, he may not necessarily benefit from a longer approach. I’ve never had any jumper go past a 16-step approach.

Measuring Steps

When measuring the total distance and the number of steps for each athlete, have them get their marks on the track rather than the pit. Introducing jumpers to the runway—even veterans—when you first measure distances will lead them to alter their mechanics to hit the board. Have them line up at the starting line or finish line, with either a crouch start or rollover start, and measure the total number of steps and distance from that point.

Be sure to include a “pop up.” If you simply run through with a predetermined amount of steps, the measurement will be inaccurate. A “pop up,” as shown in this video, includes the p-step and takeoff.

Have them do this 4-6 times on the track and place a piece of tape from the takeoff spot each time. Then measure the distance from the most consistent takeoff spot. For example, if the athlete has five takeoffs, and three pieces of tape are within a few inches of each other, measure from that spot all the way back to the starting point. Next, take that measurement and begin from the back of the board (nearest to the sand pit) and measure away from the pit.

When should a coach allow the athletes to take their marks and practice approaches on the runway? When you feel comfortable, they can attack the board without hesitation. We generally have a month before our first meet. In the past, I have allowed jumpers to start practicing approaches within two weeks after measuring their approach distance. But two years ago we didn’t practice any approaches on the runway until we got to the actual meet. That is part of the art of coaching: figuring out what works best for your athletes.

Brandon: The Sequel

In his senior year, Brandon had knee issues, so we had to limit his triple jumping. He still did 47′-10″ and finished 3rd at the regional meet. However, he long jumped 24′-1.5″ at the same meet to earn a gold medal and punch his ticket to State. The jump set both a school record and the city record for a non-wind-aided jump. As coaches, we dream about our athletes executing the perfect jump and Brandon did it.

The weather at State two weeks later was rainy, and the boards were slippery. Yet Brandon trusted himself, his mark, and his entire approach. He leaped 22′-9.25″ to earn gold.

All the principles I’ve outlined in this article are the same ones we practice with our jumpers throughout the season and year by year. But they are only guidelines. I still search daily for anything to give my athletes and me a better understanding of the horizontal jumps.

Just like anything else in track, the horizontal jump approach is a process. Schedule time in your practices to work the approach 2 to 3 times a week. When focusing on acceleration, allow the athletes to work the drive phase from a crouch or rollover start. In max velocity, they can work on transition and final step mechanics on the track. Work the approach on the runway when you feel your jumpers are ready. Stay away from gimmicks and flashy landing and bounding drills. Instead, focus on the fundamentals that will make your jumpers faster, stronger, and more accurate on the board and enjoy the results.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

My previous article on the five best cues in developing maximal velocity stressed the limitations of conscious effort to distal parts of the body, and how feedback must be carefully done. This article shifts the focus to physical capacities and training concepts to improve the ability to run fast. It breaks down lessons I learned from coaches with a knack for getting people on the podium. Team sport athletes will also find these concepts helpful, as upright running is a fundamental need for most athletic endeavors. When I started coaching, I thought improving maximal velocity automatically happened by just doing a few fly sprints. The truth is that reaching maximal velocity is very stubborn and highly genetic, so development must be carefully orchestrated.

Rhythm Development

After writing an article on rhythm, I felt it necessary to revisit the quality, specifically about its relationship with maximal speed. The importance of prime mover rise times (rate of force production with propulsive muscle groups) and rapid silence periods (rate of muscle shutdown) is paramount for top speed, and sprinting improves when contractions become more uniform.

Watching and videoing practices of talented coaches revealed the tuning effect of those masters. They were very focused on their athletes’ times, but how they conducted their practices was just as important. The best solution is not choosing one of these options but doing both—not an easy task. Athletes given constant feedback regarding their speed with objective measurement can have very fine runs that maintain rhythm and ensure that every rep is good, not just “popping” a good one and going home.

Coaches Point: 150m runs or 30m flys are more effective by running through them with the same velocity after acceleration is completed. Even splits prevent deep fatigue and save more absolute work for later. Rhythm is about maintaining a constant rate, and controlling speed does work. Build speed up in addition to including rhythm, and see how long you can hold that velocity.

Sprinting While Fresh

Perhaps the most obvious need in quality work is patience and being confident in doing less, so athletes don’t perform speed work while fatigued. Technically speaking, no sprinter will ever be 100% fresh, and that is okay. Nobody wants to be flat, but the training between heavy and hard speed work should be enough to maintain qualities not supposed to be priorities and sometimes improve other qualities over time.

Sometimes you can’t do speed work with as much frequency as online workout templates claim. Forty-eight hours may restore the nervous system after a speed workout, but it’s never complete and other elements of the body (such as tendons) are slow regenerators. I have said countless times that improvement is about the amount of quality training during the year, not about one great week. Be conservative while slowly and incrementally increasing workloads. Every year I learn how to estimate training load more accurately given the data though team sports will always be struggling due to the complexity of the variables they have.

A lot of training programs exist. Quality-based programs require extreme precision while volume programs are about staying healthy. I like enough volume to poke the fire of adaptation to neurological stress and doing just enough speed to improve firing rates. It’s not exciting but putting all my eggs into one variable is too much of a risk.

Coaches Point: I have learned from some coaches that the three days before and after a speed session can make or break improvement. It takes a lot of confidence to rest and to do lighter workouts. I suggest mirroring the training, so no one goes back too hard too early and does the speed session in the middle of the week to remove residual fatigue.

Running Coordination

Many successful programs focus on running. That is, most of the training volume and session times cater to quality running, not sprinting. Many coaches in team sports are frightened when they see the amount of “jogging” in running-based programs and wonder where the speed work is. Keep in mind the length of the season of a professional sprinter and gradual development is fine. I will get to the point of racing and adaptation later, but preparing specifically leads to overuse syndromes and burnout. Much of fall training is fitness-oriented. While this may seem more a distraction set of exercises, it works because the progression is slow.

Talent may be enough to be a good sprinter, but to be a great sprinter you must be skilled. Many look at tempo running as a way to recover faster. During deep training, it may help, but as one is closer to ideal form it may interfere. I have been beaten plenty of times by people who did less weight training and plyometrics, and the reason was clear. The fastest sprinters are great runners. Running may be a different beast than sprinting, but they are still similar animals and being a great runner still matters.

The age-old questions are how much, when, and how fast. I don’t have an answer, but I do have a point of reference. Athletes who don’t look good while running will most likely exhibit errors when they sprint. The key is not looking at what visual qualities overlap specifically. Most kinematic measurements are related to effort and power, not replicating motions. Arm action and knee lift are really not technique issues. Most of it is speed or joint function issues. When athletes are running smoothly, they have a better chance of success. But like most things in life, no guarantees exist. Some athletes look like DVD All-Stars with drill technique or running, and fall apart in fast speed work. That stuff happens. Running is very innate, and our job is to be sculptors and reveal it.

Coaches Point: Increase the amount of running, and sprint only when ready. Running volume is based on the athlete, not the training plan. Each athlete can tolerate different volumes, and that is normal and expected. Simply look at the yearly volumes and increase more slowly than what looks good on a chart. For 1% increases in speed, we don’t need 20% bumps in volume. Make sure your athletes are competent runners so they can be great sprinters.

Elastic Power

Elastic power becomes more important than maximal strength as speed increases. The types and amounts of elastic work are always a little bit of an experiment. Clear progressions are available, and it is important to know how to measure effectively elastic power in jumping and what small transfer opportunities exist.

As we all know, jump training and/or plyometrics come with risk. It’s better to miss out on maximal or absolute benefits and address elasticity with a solid program, rather than trying to be a maestro and have things backfire. Also, tendons degenerate at different rates, and some athletes are more genetically prone to having collagen not remodel as well. Running fast doesn’t require jumping at all so be cautious. One other factor is the need for optimal levels of vitamin D. Otherwise the risk of tears to joints increases.

I have written numerous articles about plyometrics and measuring jump training. The key is not having a weakness and letting athletes blossom. But don’t force anything. When athletes are not responding to training and not improving, it’s either coaching or a dysfunction/injury. Learn to walk away with the chips on the table and not get greedy. It feels good to see the numbers improve, but at the end of the day the clock matters more than the tape measure.

After exchanges with better and more accomplished coaches, I have developed three categories of athletes: fragile, average workhorse, and resilient thoroughbred. In addition, I have identified four small stages of development. First is the awareness and exposure level for neophytes. Second is the foundational level of competence in the exercises. Third is the development or capacity type, a level that most can achieve. Fourth is the exploitation level that transfers plyometrics further than just a stimulation-type option. Each level increases risk, so everyone should be able to do the movements injury-free. Only progress to the next level when it makes sense to do so.

Coaches Point: Use plyometrics or jump training to reduce injuries and increase durability, then progress them to get an actual transfer. Every athlete is unique and every season is different with the same athlete. Do enough to be competent and learn to focus on the running and sprinting side. Do not push jumping limits too much or it is likely to backfire. Jumping is also great for tracking and managing power, so do enough to peak into the body when maximal speed work is not an option.

Meet Selection

I believe meet selection is more important than coaching for most emerging elites. It’s far easier and more common to ruin a good season with the wrong competition than not having access to great coaching. Plenty of great coaches are available, but meets can be difficult to select unless one is a world-class podium finisher. The wrong meets with the wrong competition ruin many seasons.

Some methods of selecting meets and philosophies are hard to test for validity, but meets need to provide more than just a fast surface. If the travel and timing of the meet aren’t appropriate, athletes have withdrawn from their bank accounts and missed time better spent in either training more or going to a better option. Here are some factors to consider.

When to open up? Coaches and athletes must work on a benchmark in training that projects the value of competing beyond curiosity. Not one indicator is there, but some coaches have a system when they know it’ s worth going out there.

How to open up? Does the athlete go for it and truly compete, or simply get a performance out of the way to shake things free? I am not a fan of “just go out to see what happens.” While the feeling of getting a race may sometimes be comforting, not caring about the outcome rarely helps. But it’s okay to get a meet under one’s belt to start a season if necessary. Running with nothing to lose is okay, as it’s good to experience the natural joy of sprinting without expecting something in return.

How many races? Not only does the total amount of races matter, how they are distributed is important as well. I have learned that it’s better to select meets based on when one is ready and pick times to get more training in. Each athlete is different, and some need a lot of training to race while others just use races to keep sharp and improve. It’s largely a matter of listening to the athlete and knowing when it’s time to be competitive.

Coaches Point: Athletes and coaches must pick meets that matter and have enough to peak during the season. Sometimes it makes sense to open later, start training later, or even open up early. Competition is great training for those who need arousal to sprint fast, and racing schedules should be based on training and mental readiness. While confidence comes from self-belief, it’s increased from good training. So it’s important to pick meets that athletes feel like they can do well in.

Putting it all together and Planning

It’s not a mystery that maximal speed is trainable but requires a lot of attention to planning. In deciding on what needs work first, I start with testing and look at training history. Some athletes are wide open to improving in some areas, and some concepts are maxed out or have been overly focused on. Some coaches have injured athletes because they felt comfortable with one area. I learned early that diversifying stress is the best way to reduce unnecessary risk.

Reduce competition or team practices. High-volume programs are never a problem if they are working. However, many programs operate on junk reps or junk volume. Junk volume can be anything that doesn’t make an athlete better. The problem is that most programs doing junk work are not aware of what they are doing. Years ago in Boston, I sat down with Mladen Jovanovic. He used the term “stupid fatigue”: getting tired but not improving. We also see that a lot with circuit training.

Decide if your jump training is working and worth the effort. Plyometrics either help or harm. Period. The margin of error for plyometrics is so small that it’s more likely one is going to feel the effects of tendon problems down the road than getting better from them. A good overall plan is to address plyometrics, but don’t push them unless you are a jumping athlete. While adding plyometrics helps, thinking they are the missing link may be dangerous. Also, the goal of any rehabilitation program is doing the training that got you there in the first place. If athletes can’t replicate activities they did in the past, you need to rethink if the therapy was successful. Injustice (inability to perform an exercise from the past) somewhere means injustice everywhere later. Finally, don’t fight something. It may mean that someone is damaged goods, and it’s better to move on if you have exhausted all resources for improvement.

Manage fatigue but don’t avoid it. Everyone in sports science is afraid of fatigue. Ignorance is bliss sometimes, and negative attention to anything—be it injury or fatigue—is a bad idea. At times when one is not competing or practicing intensely, heavy training and residual fatigue are normal and necessary. Being fresh is important when doing quality work. But to do quality work one needs to build up, and that may not mean doing quality work all the time. Too many times I see efforts to feel fresh, and one needs to be fresh during near maximal performance days.

Developing maximal velocity from training is not just limited to the ideas above. It’s about using what has worked in the past and adding a few more details that polish speed. Everything has to be right when athletes hit a genetic ceiling, so it’s never overzealous to pay attention to detail. Even a .01 improvement in a flying 10m can help someone go from finalist to winner.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

A Book Review by Jake Jensen

This article offers a comprehensive review of noted Russian strength coach Dr. Anatoliy Bondarchuk’s most recent book, Champion School: A Year to Year Model to Developing Elite Athletes. Comprised of five chapters and 231 pages, the book begins with a brief history of the Soviet Union’s methods of constructing multi-year training systems. Chapters two and three go into detail about the biological constraints of constructing these systems, such as age-sensitive periods of development and how different energy systems require different modes of development.

The final two chapters are really where readers get the most for their money. They are packed with the methods Dr. Bondarchuk has used over the years to develop Olympians such as hammer thrower Yuriy Sedykh and shot putter Justin Rodhe. The discussions include how to periodize a yearly cycle of training for athletes of various ages, optimal exercise correlations to use in each phase, and how best to peak athletes for competition.

Dr. B provides templates for progressing athletes from general physical preparation (GPP) during the off-season into specialized physical preparation (SPP) as the competitive season draws near. These templates provide much of what a coach needs to put into use immediately, including the percentage of each type of training (e.g. GPP vs. SPP) during each month leading up to competition.

For those not familiar with Dr. Bondarchuk, he is a legend in the world of sport. He won two Olympic medals in the hammer: gold at the Munich Games in 1972 and bronze at Montreal four years later. He also set world hammer records on two occasions in the late 1960s.

His athletic resume, however, pales in comparison to his coaching achievements. His athletes have won four Olympic medals, five World Championships medals, and nearly a dozen European and Pan American Games medals. Sedykh currently holds the hammer throw world record.

While impressive, achieving greatness as both an athlete and a coach is not unprecedented. However, being able to navigate the complex bureaucracy in the world of strength and conditioning is a different matter entirely. Dr. B. does just that in Champion School. Most of his published titles have focused on the science behind his methods. These methods are heavily influenced by his experience in track and field, which in many cases is difficult for team sport coaches to adapt. This title provides a framework within which any coach can take the methods that forged champions like Yuri Sedykh, and apply them to team sport athletes.

Champion School provides a complete package for constructing training in any sport. What makes this title so special is the way in which the material is presented. Dr. B takes the reader through the history of where his methods came from. He provides details about the Soviet method of long-term athlete development (LTAD). These details include the age-sensitive periods for the development of essential athletic qualities in young people. He walks the reader through these stages of development and spends an entire chapter on the various sport systems.

This part leads up to a discussion about Dr. Bondarchuk’s philosophy on athlete development. This bridge approach to discussing his training philosophy makes his hammer throws philosophy applicable to coaches in any sport. Often times in training books, content may be difficult to apply. This is usually due to rhetoric. Rhetoric is like a wall between coaches in different areas of sport. For example, a football coach doesn’t necessarily use the same jargon as a hammer throws coach.

The book tears down those walls, using language any coach can understand. Dr. Bondarchuk also includes diagrams, charts, and over 10 pages of illustrated exercises presented in groups that allow each exercise to complement one another, thereby achieving a greater training effect. Classical training manuals (Bondarchuk, Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky, and Dr. Vladimir Zatsiorsky) often cite Soviet methods of physical development. These methods date back to the 1950s when Russian scientists began studying how to optimize physical development over an entire life cycle. They made great strides in understanding the role of age-sensitive periods of training. For example, flexibility capabilities increase to a much greater degree in the pre-peak height velocity (PHV) stages of growth as compared to post-PHV.

There are also stages where speed and power are more sensitive to improvements. These stages are variable, based on an array of factors including gender. For boys, the speed-sensitive ages are 7–9 and for girls 10–12. Dr. B. lays out all these age periods and accompanies them with expert discussion. This discussion occupies a large portion of Chapter 2.

After laying the groundwork for understanding an LTAD system in Chapter 2, Dr. B. introduces the biological systems that factor into athlete preparation in Chapter 3. These guidelines cover general topics like strength and speed as well as more acute adaptations. For example, there is a section dedicated to developing anaerobic alactic output, or “speed endurance” as he puts it. Here the reader will find references to energy systems critical to performing this type of work, such as the phosphocreatine system which is the primary metabolic function fueling high-intensity exercise.

He goes on to suggest the best practices for developing this type of power, providing sets and reps with their appropriate rest times. This type of information is especially useful for team sport coaches, as it provides a scientific measuring stick for base-conditioning work. The discussion in Chapter 3 also includes some of Dr. B’s famous complex method training templates that are organized according to periods of developing peak condition. Here is an example:

One of the possible variants of distribution of training means over 20 periods of sports form development (the rest of the 20 periods are in the book, as this is an excerpt)

Chapter 3 also includes ideas for structuring training volume, according to both total hours and the type of work being performed. In the chart below, Dr. B lays out a 4-stage (1-year) cycle of training and details how much of each type of training should be included in each phase. GPP consists of exercises that don’t relate in form to the competition exercises. For a baseball player, for example, this would be jumping, hopping, and squatting.

SP stands for special preparation and includes exercises that vaguely resemble competition movements. For an American football player, this would be change-of-direction drills that require the athlete to stop and start laterally.

SPP is exercises are exactly or very closely resemble competition movements. For an American football player, this would be running plays at full speed without a defender, or helmet-only without shoulder pads.
The fourth phase ends as competition begins, or the start of the season. For soccer players this would be a week or two prior to their first match.

Figure 1. Sample exercises.

This type of loading chart makes the prescription of training loads much easier. The above template is a general guide that serves as an example of what a tapered loading program would look like. Dr. Bondarchuk provides more than 10 different ways to structure the annual relationships between GPP, SPP, SP and competition phases.

Chapter 3 concludes with an awesome addition that hasn’t been included in any of Dr. B’s previous books, at least to my knowledge: a 12-page encyclopedia of movements which he has combined into complexes to achieve a greater training effect than if performed independent of one another. Really cool stuff—take a look.

The discussion of scientific principles for athlete development—combined with the charts explaining the loads in Chapter 3—make a good foundation for the meaty discussion comprising the rest of the book. The bulk of Chapter 4 includes similar templates with each method for development. The sports form development methods outlined throughout the chapter fit a variety of sports. This works great for team sport coaches because some offseasons provide more time to train than others.

The stage-complex method on page 154 is an example of the type of sports form development methods in the chapter. This particular method adapts the SP phase to work in conjunction with short GPP and SPP phases. Athletes who benefit from this model of development would have a relatively long offseason and spend the bulk of their training in sport-specific work. This would work well for American football players who do a large percentage of their off-season training in the SP and SPP phases (think spring football and fall camp). This chapter also includes sections dedicated exclusively to methods for preparing athletes in particular sports such as track and field jumps and throws, cyclical endurance events, individual events, fencing, team sports, shooting sports, and strength sports.

As Chapter 4 wraps up the discussion on methods for developing sports form, Chapter 5 rounds out the development equation by outlining a variety of means that can be distributed across these different methods. It focuses on volume and intensity as opposed to just the phases of preparation discussed in the previous chapter. Dr. B frequently quotes A.N. Vorobyev, a famous Soviet weightlifter and coach.

There are seven basic means in the final 30 pages. These means vary from “wave-form” —focusing on the exercises selected for training—to “variational,” which primarily relies on combining low intensity and very high-intensity loads in the same micro-cycles.

I was most interested in the “jump-form” means for distributing volume and intensity. In this method, volume training is combined with high-intensity weight lifting. I like this method because it closely resembles the western conjugate style of training. It maintains a certain level of GPP while congruently building up SPP. I used this style of training for my powerlifting prep, so reading about it was pretty cool.

The material included in this book is unprecedented as far as Bondarchuk’s books are concerned. Compared to his previous titles, there is very little discussion about the science of correlational analysis. The rhetoric in this book is acutely targeted at the machinery of training the athlete over the entire life cycle, from cradle to podium. This approach makes it much easier to put the information into practice. I recommend it to sport or strength coaches looking to improve their athletes’ preparation. It is available for purchase through the publisher’s website and also Elitefts and HMMR Media.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jake Jensen is strength and conditioning coaching assistant at Brigham Young University, where he works for the director of football performance. He is currently finishing his undergraduate degree in sports science with a minor in nutrition at the University of Utah. His areas of experience include integration of sports performance technologies such as POLAR, Catapult, and Omegawave as well as translating Russian training texts.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

Champion School: A Year to Year Model to Developing Elite Athletes appeared first on Freelap USA.

By Carl Valle

When I attended USATF Level I school in 1997, a level III student told me that drills and cues were virtually lies, since the speed of contraction—as well as the very point of most of sprinting—is reflexive in nature. His words upset me, as I wanted cues and magic words to make my athletes go from slowpokes to podium performers.

Events such as swimming are basically artificial techniques and therefore highly dependent on instruction. On the other hand, as the fastest form of human locomotion, sprinting is natural and more innate. So, if cues and verbal commands are likely to be ineffective, why bother with a list—let alone the “five best”? The answer is that just because verbal instruction may have little impact, it doesn’t mean coaches are simply lap counters or motivators. It means only so much transfers from drills and verbal instruction.

A lot of online discussion and debate, especially in the form of interesting tweets, has focused on internal and external cues. Some coaches have publicly attempted to carve out a niche. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid from the false “Holy Grail.” Instead, read up on both the research and reverse-engineer amazing performances by coaches who are making important changes. I have traversed the world wanting to know the truth of what works and have been both amazed and gravely disappointed.

In this article, I will explain what I believe to be true from witnessing coaches and medal-winning sprinters over the last 20 years. I have questioned and peppered the best, and some answers are not glamorous. The brutal truth is that many coaches want to believe they have superhero vision followed by the ability to choose the perfect set of words—almost like casting spells.

It’s hard to know what is working, but over years the video and the performances will tell the story. How one gets there is debatable, as the brain isn’t an easy part of the body to measure and research, but we are learning more. If coaches focus on guiding athletes, things improve with the right environment and direction. But when they push their corrections too much, their athletes’ brains backfire and result in regression or stagnation. You need to do what works, yet provide concrete evidence to yourself and your athletes before believing that a few sentences are working wonders.

Task > Talk or No Cues at All

My favorite cue is explaining a task and demonstrating it, rather than making an internal or external suggestion. Athletes are not drones to control remotely, but living beings wanting to get better. Coaches are obsessed with cues because they believe the answer is themselves, yet most of the time it’s simply a matter of setting up a path to improvement rather than hand-holding.

Instead of being the instructor and teaching, have your athletes acquire skills without having to learn them in the first place. The body is wired to sprint, and as we learn more about the brain, I think Central Pattern Generators will be mapped out. It’s not what to teach or tell; it’s what not to instruct. I had the pleasure of talking to Tom Tellez and appreciated that he was adamant about doing minimal teaching and not overcoaching.

The key in motor skill acquisition is not the magic word or cool phrase, but doing activities that encourage self-organization. Athletes, especially the talented ones, are excellent problem solvers. The goal of teaching is giving the appropriate series of workouts over time rather than hunting for the magic words. Obviously, some instruction is needed, and communication must be enough to nudge athletes forward. For developing maximal speed, it’s much more effective for athletes to sprint fresh and having great talent around the developing ones than using catchphrases.

Simple and consistent exposure to straightforward tasks like repeated sprinting will only need just a touch here and there. Focus on slow progression versus instant change. Also, not tampering with athletes by adding a coach’s perspective retains natural styles of force expression. It also fosters faster improvement instead of constant hammering with suggestions that are right on paper, but slow down the growth process.

High Knee Build Ups

One drill I have never let go of is the classic high knee build up. It’s simple but so effective that every sprinter should employ it at some stage of their career, and refer back when struggling with their maximum velocity mechanics. The drill is as follows: Have athletes run in place with a high knee (not as high as the hip but not lazy, a few inches below the top of the pelvis) and strike the ground like it’s hot—a universal cue we all have probably used. The rhythm is near 80% of the turnover of sprinting and the goal is to increase both horizontal speed and frequency to a full sprint.

The beauty of the drill is that most athletes look great running in place, and it’s easier to hold onto what is right by transitioning into sprinting rather than trying to shout a few words at athletes running at 11 meters per second. Eventually, they are just sprinting naturally—the goal of all instruction. At the very end, the athlete is doing a near-maximal sprint.

The purpose of the sprint drill is not to teach front side mechanics, but encourage the sensation of letting the body do the work by giving back to the track (the Randy Huntington Concept ) versus trying to be strong and applying more force into the ground. I have seen plenty of Instagram photos of hexbar deadlifts with 500 pounds, yet rarely see any sub-10 guy from the Caribbean needing that to run world-class. Again this drill is not teaching mechanics, but allowing athletes to express speed without muscling out or having flat and inelastic running. Audit the drill by timing the sprint zone and seeing how they mature.

Stepping Over High Grass

While in Tampa in the fall of 1996 I saw some sprinters training and noticed the best ones decelerated longer and more gracefully than the slower ones. They seemed to “ride the glide” and constantly reinforced the classic cue of “stepping over high grass.” It’s not perfect, but it does distract the athlete from getting lost in the world of trying to do more to get faster.

The goal of this cue is keeping the pelvis under the body and not trying to override the stretch reflexes of recovery. For years I felt the cue was worthless as knee recovery is not very volitional. But many athletes respond to it by reducing the drive to force things.

When to speak or share this “cue” is up to the coach, but I want the athlete to have the concept of keeping the body balanced and upright and wanting to reduce contact times by not stomping or pushing too long. Reminding the athlete here and there about the sensation of stepping over will create an inspection of the feedback from the track.

At first glance kinetically, the concept of reducing contact times by conscious effort or external instruction may seem false, but the hidden purpose is not about the legs at all. Front side mechanics are about recovery from the same or more forces put into the ground faster, and keeping the hips neutral is not so much core strength but about removing cognitive errors from the natural benefits of reactive motions. Some athletes will lose a little speed by removing forces with overdoing the knee lift and stepping over, but the sensation of automatic and crisp strikes of the ground has worked for many great coaches and sprinters.

Taller, Lighter, Faster

Reinforcing the above tasks is the cue of telling athletes they are significantly lighter and a few inches taller. Verbally instructing an athlete to lengthen and feel lighter is perhaps just a placebo, but I see several changes on video when I have visited coaches who emphasized those two changes. Obviously athletes are not reducing their weight—that would be one amazing cue!—but the purpose is to encourage better hips.

The “getting taller” cue is often designed to get athletes out of sitting, but that’s not an error so much as an attitude towards maximal velocity. Sitting is usually described as an athlete’s center of mass (COM) being too low based on leg length. At midstance, the knee angle should be sufficient to project the COM forward and slightly up to allow recovery of the stride and an increase of speed.

The pelvis will tilt and turn during the sprint cycle, and too much of any motion may be a weakness or joint restriction issue. Sitting or dropping the COM too far, even just slightly, will result in the foot striking too far in front, thus increasing non-propulsive braking forces. Athletes need contact length to create forces, but too much will reduce speed and increase injury rates.

Some coaches use weighted vests to get more out of the cue of being taller. Gravity and fatigue will create bad habits of being saggy and cueing is just reinforcing the sharp posture needed to be sprinting fast. A valid argument is that cueing keeps athletes from being too relaxed. But cues are not going to work if athletes are sitting more than normal, as fatigue tends to cause errors more than poor cueing.

Perhaps the cue is nothing more than removing a lethargic approach to the demanding task of sprinting and making an athlete more alert.

Arm Action Temporal Cueing

Coaching arms for better sprinting technique or more speed is controversial. Some research has returned to investigating the contributions of the arms and core. In the past, the serape effect of the back muscles was thought to keep the torso stiff during sprinting, though it was uncertain how much—if at all—it helped sprinters at maximal speed. Many athletes with great pull-up strength are not faster because they add 45-pound plates during workouts, so that idea has lost favor. I have always been a fan of pulling for the upper body and feel the bench press has value, but strong arms are not making elites any faster.

The only change I have seen occurs when athletes either increase their range of motion too much or reduce it to move their limbs faster. Again, athletes sometimes get fooled by faster limb velocities by shortening the arm action, as the natural sensations feel productive—but any increases in top speed are difficult to detect. Conversely, some athletes over-swing the arms or drum (bend only at the elbow) and this will usually reduce the stride length (leg power) but or feel like one is getting a better push. Most older sprinters graduate away from arm errors, but high school sprinters tend to lack maturity when rushing to improve.

Arm mechanics are highly related to feedback loops from the lower body. Most of the focus involves keeping a solid beat (rhythm) and doing what one has rehearsed at slower speeds. Maximal sprinting is a strange Zen experience and unique, so coaches must work with their athletes to find a set of exchanges in execution that create fast times in training with balanced upper body mechanics. It’s simple, but making sure arms are purposeful and relaxed with the proper range of motion is never easy for everyone.

Closing Thoughts on Cueing and Maximal Velocity

Like some supplements, most cues don’t work at all. If they do, they only complement the meat and potatoes of training. I want cues to work. I like hearing that something out of my mouth changes things with athletes as it’s a special feeling. But the best reward is seeing athletes get better by giving them a spark inside. I am no expert in coaching maximal speed, but I know what doesn’t work for me and what doesn’t work for many elite coaches who are experts.

Use whatever you need to get the job done, but it’s better to say less and plan better than fall in love with talking. Saying something to athletes who are making an error does feel empowering because it seems like you are addressing the issue. Sure, you can remind an athlete of an error and give a cue. However, many issues are not execution problems, but simple errors in fatigue management and physical development from outside variables.

Not everything falls into place in sprinting, and many of the best coaches in the world are juggling injury histories and working with people masterfully. It’s easy to get seduced into looking for the best cues, but only give feedback you know has a chance of being absorbed. A sprinter moving at 4-5 strides a second can’t fix a motion that may need to change in less than a tenth of a second. So it’s better to shape strategies of more controllable elements that set up maximal speed mechanics rather than trying to verbally fix an error.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Ken Jakalski

At clinics, I often ask coaches to tell me their all-time favorite drill, the “dream drill” they find most beneficial in helping their athletes run faster. Answers vary. Some like fast, straight leg-impact bounds, what Chris Korfist refers to as “Prime-Times” because they resemble Deion Sanders’s strut into the end zone. Others prefer the Gerard Mach ABC drills. According to Vern Gambetta, those drills are intended to “specifically strengthen muscles in the postures and actions that are similar to those that occur during the sprint action.”

Gerard Mach

But drills can be problematic. Gambetta considered the technical benefit of the Mach drills as ancillary and noted that “if they are not taught properly and constantly coached, incorrect execution and repetition will ingrain bad habits.”

I know two things about drills: 1) coaches generally like them, and 2) coaches are so focused on proper execution that if you show them videos of athletes demonstrating those drills, they could spend considerable time pointing out technical mistakes those athletes are making. The reality of speed drills is that coaches often disagree on the proper mechanics to perform them properly.

So what is the one drill I like, the one drill hard for athletes to do wrong or for coaches to debate incorrect execution?

The answer goes back to the mid-70s when I attended a clinic at the University of Illinois Circle Campus. The keynote jumps speakers were Polish pole vaulting coach Andrzej “Andy” Krzesinski and his wife Elzbieta, affectionately called “Golden Ela.” Both were former Olympians. Andy finished 12th in the pole vault at the 1960 Rome Olympics while Ela won the long jump gold medal at the 1956 Melbourne Olympics and silver in 1960. Andy coached 1976 high jump gold medalist Jacek Wzola and 1980 pole vault gold medalist Wladyslaw Kozakiewicz.

Andrzej and Elzbieta Kreszinski

I thought their presentation was excellent, but many coaches left early because of the difficulty in understanding their English. Growing up in a Polish family where many relatives had similar language issues, I didn’t have a problem understanding the points Krzesinski was making or the description of the drills he was presenting. One drill, in particular, caught my attention. Krzesinski said it could easily be performed at any school with stadium bleachers. He didn’t give it a name, so I called it the “Polish Bleacher Bound.” It remains my all-time favorite.

An athlete starts with the right foot on top of a bleacher seat, with the left extending down to the bleacher tread. The athlete then drives up into a full extension jump. The left foot is now on the top of the seat, and the right foot drops down to the shorter tread. Repeat the movements in the opposite direction to return to the starting point. To make the drill more complex, have the athlete drive forward down the length of the bleachers and then back, which continually reverses the extended and loaded legs.

Polish Bleacher Drill

Why do I like this drill so much? For starters, it is easy to execute and requires no additional equipment.

Driving up from a thigh parallel position isn’t easy, but the point of emphasis is the contribution of the fully extended drop leg. This requires a powerful eccentric contraction. The greater the force applied by the dropping leg, the less the load on the opposite leg trying to drive up to full extension. With more advanced athletes, the placement of the foot on the bleacher seat can be delayed until the foot of the fully extended leg lands on the bleacher tread.

In a 2004 article, “Means and Methods of Sprint Training,” John Cissik notes my insights from an earlier article: “As opposed to better stride length and stride frequency through the leg swing drills used by many, Jakalski advocates that improvements in stride lengths and frequencies are determined largely, or perhaps entirely, from the ground force applied during the stance phase . . . . According to Jakalski, elite sprinters are achieving their greater velocities through a combination of exerting more force against the ground and an ability to exert it more quickly than other athletes.”

Coaches may find Polish Bleacher Bounds as a way for sprinters to experience the kind of big forces applied in minimal time that are essential to achieve faster top-end speeds. If so, we owe a big debt to Andrzej Kreszinski, the diminutive Polish jumps coach who, on a cold day in Chicago, shared his expertise with coaches for whom English was not a second language.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

References

Cissik, John M. “Means and Methods of Speed Training, Part I.” Strength and Conditioning Journal 26.4 (2004): 24-29.

Gambetta, Vern. “Mach Sprint Drills: A Personal Perspective.” Functional Path Training, September 29, 2015.

Hosted by Tony Holler and Chris Korfist
Sponsored by Exxentric and Freelap USA
Date: December 11-12, 2015
Location: Montini High School, 19W070 16th St, Lombard, IL (Chicago Area)
Cost: $150 early-bird, $225 at the door
Click Here For Payment: Payment Link

Mission Statement

We will share the newest ideas in speed training translating to success in football and track. Explosive speed will be broken down into sprinting, jumping, and strength training. If you are looking for volume-based, old school textbook material, look elsewhere.

Speakers

Latif Thomas
CEO Complete Track and Field, LLC

Chris Korfist
Sprint Coach Montini H.S. (IL)
State Championships 2009, 2014
Slow Guy Speed School

Tony Holler
Head Track Coach Plainfield North H.S. (IL)
State Championships 1995, 1999, 2001
@pntrack & Plainfield North Track

Chad Lakatos
Head Track Coach Edwardsville H.S. (IL)
State Championships 2007, 2008, 2015
@trackehs & EHS Track

Cal Dietz
Strength Coach University of Minnesota
Author of Triphasic Training
XL Athlete

Dan Fichter
Head Football Coach Irondequoit H.S. (NY)
Wanna Get Fast

Karen Raden
Certified Clinical Nutritionist

Alec Holler
Hurdle Coach Edwardsville H.S. (IL)
State Championship 2015
@trackehs & EHS Track

Joel Smith
Assistant Strength & Conditioning Coach University of California
Author of Vertical Foundations & Vertical Ignition
Just Fly Sports

Lou Sponsel
Head Football Coach Palatine Fremd (IL)

Dan Hartman
Head Football Coach Hinsdale Central (IL)

Schedule

Friday Night Auditorium Sessions
5:30 Tony Holler: “The 10 Essentials of Sprint Training and the Main Thing”
6:30 Chris Korfist: “Training to Run Fast with No Space”
8:30 Latif Thomas: “Specific Strength Progressions & Acceleration Complexes”

Saturday Morning Gym Sessions
8:30 Latif Thomas: “Teaching and Progressing Acceleration & Top Speed Complexes”
9:30 Tony Holler: “30 Minute Sprint Workout in a Gym”
10:30 Chris Korfist: “Toys and Demonstrations”

Saturday Afternoon Breakout Sessions
12:00 Dan Hartman: “Coaching Football in 2015”
12:00 Karen Raden: “Nutrition”
12:00 Cal Dietz: “The Magic of the French Contrast”

1:00 Joel Smith: “Plyometric Implementation and Progression for the Jumping Events”
1:00 Alec Holler: “Turning Sprinters into Hurdlers”
1:00 Cal Dietz: “Triphasic Training for Football”

2:00 Latif Thomas: “Block Starts and Acceleration”
2:00 Dan Fichter: “Implementing a Year Round Speed Program for Football with Limited Space”
2:00 Chris Korfist: “Activation”

3:00 Chad Lakatos: “Dominate the Sprint Relays”
3:00 Dan Fichter: “Training to Run Fast with No Space – Isometrics”
3:00 Tony Holler: “Activation”

4:00 Lou Sponsel: “Speed-Based Football”
4:00 Chris Korfist: “Ankle Rocker and it’s Implications”
4:00 Dan Fichter: “Activation”

Payment

Click here to purchase your ticket.

Montini High School is 17 miles from O’Hare and 23 miles from Midway. Dozens of hotels and restaurants are located within five miles of Montini High School.

For more information email, call, or text Tony Holler at 630-849-8294 or tony.holler@yahoo.com

Sponsors

By Tony Holler

Editors Note: Coach Holler will be one of the speakers at the upcoming Track-Football Activation Consortium December 11-12, 2015.

My father Don finally retired after attending 73 first days of school. He turns 80 this December. I have taught for 35 years. So has my wife, Jill. My father-in-law, Ben Brinkley, taught 20 years and then went to work for IEA/NEA in the 70s, helping teachers negotiate contracts. Both my sisters, Nancy Hurckes and Jane Johnston, are career educators. My son, Alec, is a teacher and recently married a teacher. My youngest son, Quinn, plans to teach.

Whew.

We are also a family of coaches. My father, my son, and I have collectively logged 90 years of coaching. I’ve often argued that teaching and coaching are one and the same, but maybe not.

I’m at the age when people seem interested in my opinions. The status quo routinely dismisses the ideas of young people. The wisdom of the elderly sadly goes ignored in the digital age. It seems I am living in a brief window of relevance. Therefore, I write.

As a young teacher in the 1980s, I said, “If our superintendent was a football coach, he would go 0–9 every year.” So I guess this article has been 30 years in the making.

Schools try to be everything to everybody. On the other hand, they mandate a rigid college-bound curriculum. Yet they are at the mercy of elected school boards and politicians. Putting it kindly, elected people are seldom experts in education.

Rehearsed politicians remind me of school superintendents. While Donald Trump may be a clown, he reminds me of a nutty coach and I love it when he boldly proclaims, “We need victories in this country! We don’t have victories anymore!” Victories are elusive in today’s schools.

I’m not involved in school improvement. I serve on no committees. My principal is a good guy, but I’m not on his administrative team. I don’t think the Unit 202 superintendent knows my name. I try to do my job and keep my opinions to myself. As 1960s icon Hunter S. Thompson said, “I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.”

I’ve spent most of my life dreaming of better schools. If I were king, high schools would operate like football teams or track programs. Coaches know victory.

Sports Are Not Graduation Requirements

No sport is “required” to graduate. Participating in cross country may result in life-long physical fitness, but cross country is not required for graduation. Playing football may improve physical and mental toughness, but football is not compulsory. Basketball might teach teamwork better than anything else in modern schools, but it remains an elective. The world’s greatest sport, track & field, would be ruined if it was mandated.

When you push teenagers, they push back.

Several years ago, I met with our head football coach and proposed a winter speed and strength program. He would be in charge of the weight room, and I would oversee sprint training. I showed him a DVD of athletes doing my workouts. He loved it. He said, “We will make the program mandatory!” I said no. I told him we would make the program so good that kids would want to attend. He agreed. “But if they don’t come, we will make it mandatory!” he added.

Welcome to the world of today’s high schools: required courses, mandatory attendance, and consequences to anyone who resists.

My high school is basically a college prep school. Our main quantifier of success is the ACT Test. Who came up with this idea? The ACT is a predictor of college success—not a quantifier of learning, not an achievement test. If high schools were honest, the mission statement at most of them would be, “To prepare students for the next level.” Before 1970, less than 20% of high school students attended college. Now 65.9% attend college, the majority taking watered-down courses. Some graduate with $100K of debt, a meaningless degree, and an alcohol problem. Educators buy into the madness. Who speaks the truth in education today? Teachers do their job and keep their opinions to themselves. When told to jump, administrators ask “How high?” Colleges collect their profits. College graduates reside in their parents’ basements.

“But if you don’t make math and science mandatory, kids won’t take math and science,” I often hear. I disagree. Improve or eliminate bad courses. Find teachers who relate to kids. Football is brutal. Wrestling is miserable. Cross country athletes run thousands of miles. Despite the blood, sweat, and tears of interscholastic sports, kids keep signing up. So why must we mandate math and science?

“But don’t kids choose their classes in high school?” This is a misconception. Students choose between Honors English and English, but they still must take English.

It seems every kid at my high school takes science, math, English, P.E., history, and a foreign language. They gulp down a cafeteria lunch in 25 minutes and spend 25 minutes warehoused in a study hall. Yet few of them learn. You see, education has become a game of hoop-jumping, meeting arbitrary standards, and taking nonsensical standardized tests. Most high school kids can’t speak a foreign language, but they pass all the tests. They take P.E. but don’t become physically fit. Study guides provide the answers for upcoming tests. Our kids purchase Cliff Notes rather than actually reading The Grapes of Wrath. Worst of all, our kids cheat. Wait. Maybe cheating is not the worst thing. The worst thing is the fact that kids don’t love to read, they don’t get excited about science, and they don’t understand the importance of math. To the average teenager, school sucks.

Nick Wolf was Plainfield North’s Athlete of the Year in 2015. At 6-3 and 325 pounds, Nick was a star football player, a state qualifier in wrestling, and our best shot putter. If successful completion of soccer, basketball, and baseball were graduation requirements, Nick may not have graduated.

We need to stop pounding square pegs into round holes. If our country prides itself in freedom, why do we incarcerate teenagers?

“Incarceration” is not an overstatement. We have cameras everywhere in our building because schools received millions for security systems after Columbine. From 7:05 to 2:10, our 2,000 students are behind walls. Once in a while, K9 units search for pot. Going home for lunch is forbidden. I joke that high school is “teenage daycare,” but my students don’t laugh.

If schools were more like sports, maybe kids would love school.

Ahh, now we are getting somewhere. If students attended courses by choice, courses would be like sports. Teachers would act more like coaches. Students would not sleep through class. But what if some courses became obsolete? Easy answer. Find a new teacher. Or get rid of the miserable course and create another one worth taking. None of this goes on in today’s schools. The status quo has it all wrapped down tight. The buses run on time; the cafeteria runs like a machine, and students are herded from class to class with amazing efficiency. But our main mission goes unfulfilled.

Let’s flip this idea. What if sports were run like schools? What if they were compulsory? What if we forced every kid to choose a fall sport, a winter sport, and a spring sport? One thing is for sure—I would no longer coach. My athletes motivate me. Their enthusiasm excites me. Everything would turn to shit if kids were forced to play football or run track. The unmotivated, I-don’t-want-to-be-here kids would infect the motivated, inspired ones. Coaches would lose their passion. Coaches would spend their time fulfilling someone else’s agenda—the required material. Coaches would be forced to drink Common Core Kool-Aid and pretend that all is good. Sports would become just like algebra, biology, or Spanish.

Coaches Don’t Spend 80% of Their Time with the 20% of Kids Who Can’t Do the Work

George W. Bush won’t be happy with me. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) had good intentions but is a total disaster. Coaches knew it right away. Coaches don’t pretend to provide the same experience for every kid. Do a wide receiver and an offensive tackle have the same experience? Does the backup quarterback take the same number of snaps as the starter? Does everyone on a basketball team play the same number of minutes and score the same number of points? Do we expect every athlete in a track meet to meet an arbitrary minimum performance standard? Hell no! In point of fact, some kids don’t even make the team. Some kids are left behind and that’s okay.

Education leaders pretend every kid should score touchdowns and classroom teachers should be held accountable. Doing their duty, teachers spend 80% of their time with the 20% of their students lacking the skills to learn what the curriculum mandates. In the meantime, the best students are bored, and their curiosity stagnates.

I will never forget the day our assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction informed over 50 district science teachers that chemistry and physics would become graduation requirements for every Plainfield student. “The data shows that students who take chemistry and physics outperform those that don’t on the ACT,” he assured us. We knew that only the upper half of high school students took chemistry, and even fewer took physics. They naturally performed well on the ACT. But the man in the suit and tie brooked no debate. “You can’t argue with the data,” he told us. He moved on to a higher paying job shortly after changing our graduation requirements. We now water down chemistry and physics courses and pretend. Coaches don’t pretend.

Before you deluge me with hate mail, I am not an elitist. Kids who don’t like football can run cross country. If a kid can’t shoot a basketball, he can wrestle. If a kid can’t hit a baseball, he can run track. I wish we had the same options for students. We used to.

The main solution to this crisis is to stop pretending. Coaches don’t pretend. How has education gone so wrong? When did we decide every kid must be successful in chemistry and physics?

Who is the man behind the curtain? Who is in charge of educational mandates? Why must we obey these mandates? In our attempt to create assertive, independent, and strong-willed adults, we teach kids to be passive, pliable, and obedient. We celebrate our freedom but incarcerate our kids and give them false choices.

Coaches Aren’t Told How to Coach

Every football program in America is unique. The combinations of formations, plays, and defensive schemes are infinite. No two programs are alike. Coaches are free to experiment and innovate. No football coach is told to run the spread offense. No coach is instructed to work on the passing game equally with the running game. Instead, they are encouraged to develop a system that best fits the talents of their team. Why aren’t teachers free to experiment and innovate?

Our varsity team runs the spread offense. My freshman team runs out of the T-formation. The varsity head coach allows me artistic freedom because I teach kids to block and tackle. We don’t make mistakes, and we’ve won 36 consecutive games. Football is football.

I train sprinters much different than the legendary Clyde Hart of Baylor. Coach Hart is in the USATF Hall of Fame. I’m in the ITCCCA Hall of Fame. Track coaches are free to innovate and be creative. Their training methods can be judged by quantifiable results. Sometimes diametrically opposed training systems produce similar results. If I were told to coach my sprinters like Clyde Hart, I would quit.

The best coaches are artists who never stagnate. Coaches are excited to Learning and trying out new things excites them. My best teachers were artists. Teachers are now told to paint by number: “If it’s not on the test don’t teach it.” Really?

One of my favorite Twitter accounts, @Sisyphus38, recently tweeted, “Realize that right now we measure that which is not worth learning, simply because it is easily measured.”

Standardization removes creativity. Teachers don’t have the enthusiasm of coaches because they fulfill someone else’s agenda. They are pawns in someone else’s game. Coaches aren’t.

Sports Programs Are Promoted

My track program is so popular that I try to cut my team down to 100 athletes after three weeks of tryouts. My Twitter account, @pntrack, is a terrific PR machine. My website, pntrack.com makes track look fun. My article last year, 10 Reasons to Join the Track Team, went viral. If I did not promote track, I would be lucky to have 30 kids.

Check out the graph above. Last year I heard that my best sophomore thrower, Arinze Ekowa, wanted to drop track and focus on football. Luckily, he sat in the front row of my chemistry class. I drew this graph right after Ohio State won the national championship to convince him that specialization was not a good idea. #WWUS stands for “What Would Urban Say.” I took a picture of my graph and tweeted it. “The Graph,” as it became known, went viral. Some people hijacked it and got thousands of retweets. One guy used it as the subject of a blog that received over one million shares. It’s been the subject of at least 15 published articles. By the way, Arinze set our sophomore discus record last spring, throwing 153-8. He is presently a dominant defensive lineman. What’s the point? Coaches promote, recruit, and inspire kids to become athletes. Why not promote, recruit, and inspire kids to take physics?

Every year my freshman football team has 60-some guys. Some of our opponents have just half as many. We promote with Twitter: @pnfreshmenFB. We write up every game online. Once games start, we practice only three times a week. We don’t run sprints at the end of practice. Our players spread the word that freshman football at Plainfield North is awesome.

Does geometry promote itself? Does U.S. History have a twitter account? Do students spread the word that Spanish is a terrific course? No. Students are forced to go to school and classes are required. See the problem?

You Play to Win the Game

Coaches are held accountable. Winning is important, very important. Most losing coaches see the writing on the wall and find other pursuits.

Great coaches survive losing seasons because they create a team culture that transcends winning and losing. My track team hasn’t won our conference for seven consecutive years, but you wouldn’t know that by watching our practices. We practice like champions. We compete like champions. Quitting the team is so rare, it seems like it never happens. No one is late for the bus. Enthusiasm for track at Plainfield North is as high as any high school I know. Every fast kid in our school who doesn’t play baseball runs track. Not winning our conference championship last spring does not mean we didn’t have a successful season. Our sprint relays finished 5th and 3rd at the IHSA state meet (42.07 and 1:27.05).

Teachers are also held accountable. This year our science department was told to give students an alternate version of the semester exam on the fifth day of school. The average score in my five honors chemistry classes was 39%. In December, my students will take the actual semester exam. Analyzing improvement of their scores will measure “growth.” The state of Illinois has determined that 25% of our teacher evaluation will be determined by such “growth.” I was glad to see that Seattle teachers had a successful strike to remove test scores from teacher evaluation.

This is why teaching and coaching will never be the same. We pretend that a computer-graded multiple choice test will measure learning just like a stopwatch measures speed. This is 100% bullshit. You would understand if you saw the standardized tests we use to measure learning.

I’m not dismissing the idea of taking tests. I wish all high school students took a comprehensive chemistry achievement test at the end of the year. Such a test could serve as a measure of how students, teachers, and schools stack up with others across the U.S.

However, any and all types of tests should be taken with a grain of salt. Should the conference track meet be the primary evaluator of a high school track coach? Heavens, no. The track coach should be judged based on multiple tests (track meets), and all testing should be counter-balanced by qualitative observations—team culture, enthusiasm, improvement, past performance, etc.

My father-in-law who worked for the Illinois Education Association once told me that teachers should be evaluated by multiple administrators, teachers, and students. I said, “But wouldn’t every evaluation be murky and meaningless?” He said, “Of course.” If he were still alive, he would be shocked to learn that teacher unions have succumbed to the notion that standardized test scores should factor into teacher evaluations.

All Men Are Not Created Equal

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Everyone loves the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, but I fundamentally disagree.

All biology teachers know that human life comes from the joining of sperm and egg, when 23 maternal chromosomes combine with 23 paternal chromosomes. The facts are the facts. Barring identical twins, no two humans are equal. Evolution produces diversity, not clones.

All coaches know, without a smidgeon of doubt, that athletes are not created equal. The opposite is true. My freshman football team spends the summer speed training. Check the rankings. The 40-yard dash is hand-timed, the 10-meter fly with Freelap Pro Coach. Forty-yard dash times range from 4.51 to 7.15, with ten-meter fly times from 1.02 to 1.84. My players range in size from 5-1 and 92 pounds to my starting left tackle at 6-0 and 235 pounds.

A freshman B game. Our running back weighs 80-some pounds. Our left tackle weighs more than four times that. Why are all kids expected to take the same classes and the same standardized tests? How can we celebrate diversity through standardized testing?

Track & field celebrates the differences in athletes. My track athletes seem like three different species of animal. My sprinters train like cats and act the same way. My distance runners remind me of well-trained dogs, hard-working and dependable. Throwers resemble grizzly bears—huge bodies capable of incredible feats of strength. My cats don’t throw the shot, my dogs don’t run the 100, and my grizzly bears don’t run the 2-mile. We are not created equal.

Birds all have wings but some fly, some swim, and some run fast. Birds would boycott standardized testing.

Coaches Don’t Give Grades

Whenever grading is brought up in teachers’ meetings, the responses are predictable.

Some teachers think grading is the key to motivating students. Good students chase the “A” like it’s a carrot on a stick. Without grades, no one would try. Without grades, students are not held accountable.

Other teachers cling to zeros and failures with questionable zeal. These self-proclaimed old-school taskmasters hold punitive grading dear.

B.F. Skinner believed positive and negative reinforcement shape behavior. Grading is the reward and punishment in public education.

My theory: Teachers became teachers because they were good at playing the game of school. They followed the rules and stood in line. They kept their hands to themselves. They stayed in their seats and raised their hand before talking. School was fun. I can still remember taking my report card home and making my parents proud. I can still remember every book I read in sophomore English. Just because school worked for some, doesn’t mean it worked for all. Teachers cling to grades because they like grades.

Coaches don’t give grades. Coaches have no reason to reward with As or punish with Fs. I would argue that athletes, as a whole, are more motivated in sports than students in school. Chasing excellence is a powerful drug. Encouragement and recognition fuel the fire of competitive athletes. Report cards would not improve my football team. Track athletes compete with no fear of getting bad grades.

Failure Is Not an Option

Too many kids fail courses in high school. I’ve seen teachers defend failure rates of 30%. If I were king, I would abolish “F” as a grade. If “D” means poor, how can you give a lower grade? In 35 years, I don’t remember failing anyone. The high school diploma is a certificate of attendance. Pass the kid.

Coaches have an advantage over teachers. Kids who skip practice or show insubordinate behavior are kicked off the team. On the other hand, public schools must educate everyone. Imagine teaching physics to a teenager who failed math and hates school. What’s the answer? First, don’t force kids who failed math to take physics. Second, failure is not an option.

Some freshman football players play like a deer in the headlights. I have kids who can’t tackle and shy away from contact— the athletic equivalent of trying to teach quantum mechanics to a kid without math skills. Some kids just don’t belong. Should I give unsuccessful football players an “F”? You coach kids of low talent by putting them in situations where they can succeed. 100-pound kids shouldn’t match up against 200-pounders. We always put kids in contact drills with others of similar size and ability. We play B-games after the A-game. Slower, smaller, and less-physical players find some degree of success. No one fails.

Track is a perfect sport. Slow guys run in slow heats. We measure every performance, so someone placing last in a race may still run a personal-record (PR) time. We celebrate the improvement of our lesser athletes more than our stars. Stars win races. Slow guys run PRs.
Soul-crushing teachers need to take a page from the coach’s handbook. Manufacture a way for kids to succeed. If they can’t hit a 95 mph fastball, put the ball on a tee and measure how far they hit it.

Coaches Are Leaders, Not Bosses

“The difference between a boss and a leader: a boss says ‘GO!’ and a leader says ‘LET’S GO!’” – E. M. Kelly

Coaches are strong-willed decision makers. However, they know the secret to success is the team buy-in. No matter how smart the coach, his team must be committed to go in the same direction.

Head coaches must sell their ideas to their staff and teams. Militaristic generals don’t coach very long in modern high schools.

There’s not much “selling” going on in academia. The mandates are top-down. Administrators follow orders. Teachers follow orders. Students follow orders. Who gives these damn orders?

Bosses hire teachers who are “team players.” Administrators are often leery of independent, strong-willed, and assertive teaching candidates. Traits making a good coach sometimes disqualify would-be English teachers. In a new teacher orientation meeting ten years ago, I heard that teachers who “don’t play well with others” would not be around long. Just as ancient man domesticated sheep, teachers have been selected based on their willingness to be herded. No teacher I know likes data-driven education, Common Core, standardized testing, or teacher evaluation based on test scores. However, teachers have been well-trained to do their job and keep their opinions to themselves.

I probably wouldn’t last long as a principal. I would break too many rules and have too many opinions. However, I would hire some damn good teachers. In addition, the teachers in my building would own their classrooms. They would be independent, strong-willed, and assertive. I would empower my teachers, not domesticate them. Then I’d get fired.

Coaches don’t need advanced degrees

Huge organizations are slow to change and impossible to reform. As a wise drunk once told me about the Roman Catholic Church, “They should blow it all up and start over.” Whether the gin-soaked sage was right or wrong is debatable, but public schools should probably consider starting over.

We copied many educational ideas from Germany. Kindergarten (child-garden) is obviously German. So is the idea of advanced degrees. Somewhere, someone decided teachers’ pay should be based on two criteria: experience and advanced degrees. The postgraduate degree is also the prerequisite for becoming an administrator.

Ask a teacher if a postgraduate course ever made them better. The answer will usually be “No.” Postgraduate degrees involve a significant investment of time and money (usually a minimum of $15K), and the courses are crap. They are typically online. If you do have to show up for class, be ready for PowerPoint and someone paid by the hour to drone from a script. Coaches are hired based on their ability to coach. Coaches are judged on their ability to promote their program and establish a positive team culture. Teams with excited, enthusiastic kids are usually successful.

In education, postgraduate coursework is key. Our best young teachers can barely make car payments and have to split rent with a roommate. At the opposite end of the spectrum, an older teacher with a Ph.D. in something silly might make three times more. The principal at a nearby high school makes $174K. Several Illinois superintendents make over $300K. I find it ironic in education that the further you get from kids, the more you make.

A natural leader with great ideas will never lead a school unless he’s paid the tuition, taken the courses, and received his certification. Any teacher will tell you horror stories of educational leaders who had no business being in charge. They paid the tuition, took the courses, and received their certification. You can’t quantify teaching, and you can’t quantify leadership.

Coaches don’t increase their worth by taking meaningless courses. Coaches don’t jump through hoops to advance. How many Hall of Fame coaches had a Ph.D.?

Coaches are performance-based educators. Coaches “play to win the game,” and we need victories in education.

+++

Chris Korfist recently recommended Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder by Nicholas Taleb. Schools could benefit from disorder. I love Taleb’s statement, “If you see fraud and don’t say fraud, then you are a fraud.” Living paycheck to paycheck, most teachers don’t say fraud. We need to stop pretending. William Butler Yeats said, “Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” Who disagrees with Yeats? Robotic teachers, mandated curricula, and standardized tests will never light a fire. FRAUD!!!

My 2012 freshmen team celebrating a 9-0 season after a cold and rainy final game. They played on a practice field with less than 100 people in attendance. Why can’t we light a similar fire in the classroom?

This article has harshly criticized public education. But don’t get me wrong. I love teaching. I could have retired last year, but I continue to teach. I’ve been a survivor, one of the lucky ones. My next article could easily be “The Miracle of Public Education,” praising schools.

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats

In many ways, schools do a darn good job. High school graduation rates are closing in on 80%. High schools provide the best teenage day care ever invented. Students who take honors classes are well-equipped to study engineering, medicine, etc. The number of students attending U.S. colleges has tripled in the last 50 years. If kids have special needs, we modify their instruction, testing, and expectations. Schools have become surrogate homes to the homeless. We educate everyone in public schools.

Teaching is all I know. I’ve spent 39 of my 56 years going to high school and hanging out with teenagers. As I enter the twilight of my teaching career, I dream of better schools. I dream of independent students who are bold and assertive. I dream of students who have the enthusiasm of athletes. I dream of teachers who run their classrooms like football coaches, tailoring courses to the talents and interests of their students. Maybe it’s time to light a fire.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

Many interesting online discussions focus on injuries and the best ways to get athletes better as they recover. Some experts focus on biomechanics, others on posture, and a few obsess with pain science. But hardly anyone deals with psychology. Athletes are much more likely to hear a lecture from a sleep expert than talk to a respected sports psychologist.

This article, therefore, is about handling the mental side of working with injured athletes who are coming back. While etiology and rehabilitation protocols are out of my scope, I will share my observations of why rebuilding confidence is just as important as rebuilding a knee joint back to strength.

I’ve designed the following mantras to help athletes achieve confidence in the coach, in the plan, and in themselves. Young athletes unused to being injured need direction, reinjured or “injury-prone” athletes need hope, and others need accountability. By taking on a lot of resurrection projects with post-college athletes, I have learned that the essential element in reconditioning lies between the ears, and it needs more than just a pat on the back.

Injury to Opportunity

Attitude is the first step toward successful rehab or reconditioning. The more confidence a coach or medical professional has, the better. Injured athletes ask questions about their future, especially if they have been surgically repaired. I first explain injury to opportunity so they understand they can turn things around if they were shortchanging training and recovery. Many times athletes do just enough or only what is required, not pushing themselves by really challenging their bodies. This attitude is especially prevalent during the offseason.

Attitude is the first step toward successful rehab or reconditioning.
Click To Tweet

When athletes are hurt, usually only a small part of their body is traumatized, sometimes as little as 1-2%. Yet they become obsessed with the injury site and sometimes test it or constantly check in with the progress. But the uninjured portion can be pushed and challenged. Having other goals helps prevent them from remaining fixated on the injured part of their body and guides them to the right frame of mind. Athletes are motivated if they feel they can do something to get them better overall while waiting to finish up their rehab.

They should, therefore, attack, within reason, anything to improve overall performance. If they are prescribed a bike routine, I want them rocking it like the Tour de France. If they can do flexibility and mobility routines, I want them maxing out the ideal ranges. Obviously too extreme is a problem, but the key is making the most of what you have. When they finally heal, athletes should have the sense they have accomplished other goals.

Winners Reload, Losers Rehab

Similar to a positive attitude is an aggressive mindset. Injured athletes mentally become patients and often feel crippled. They can still be athletes, but only by overcoming fear. They are sometimes so protective and fearful of re-injury that they hold back and do just enough to move the rehab further. Some athletes, of course, get too aggressive and think they are superman or superwoman, but many get spooked and try to protect themselves.

They often rush back into competition because they are talented and can contribute even when less than 100%. They sometimes want to make a big statement when they come back, especially if at the start of the next season. But if they are pressed for time they settle for being good enough. Reloading takes advantage of the first mantra and adds aggressiveness.

The best example of reloading is when athletes are competing, and training is compromised, as happens in the NBA and NHL with their games being so dense. A player has a hard time getting a solid session and usually resorts to a very minimalist system to get something done, but never to the point the next game is compromised. A small injury that allows athletes to train harder than their peers can almost be a blessing in disguise.

Exorcise the Demons or Be Haunted by Them

My most common mantra is “Exorcising the Demons” because of two major sports medicine errors. The first error is ego when a medical professional doesn’t thoroughly evaluate all of the information and skips to a diagnosis that may be symptomatic of something else. The second error is not finishing rehab and going back regardless of functional outcomes. The athlete nods and the team coach says they are good enough. I see this situation all the time. Additional injuries come into play and the game becomes “whack-a-mole” rather than being responsible.

So what does “Exorcising the Demons” look like? The answer is an exhaustive team approach of experts. Some people say treat the athlete instead of treating the injury. I disagree. Treat the situation with the athlete in the middle of it. Injuries often linger because the same thought process or habits set up a perfect storm that increases the chances of further injuries. The best approach to a complex injury problem is to isolate and rule out problems systematically and exhaustively.

Most of the time people say this approach is worth it, especially parents who have to pay a lot of expenses (specialists) out of pocket. Everyone wants injuries to “go away” but they don’t. They hide in compensations. Cascading injuries from the body competing hurt all the time spread the problem out and make off-seasons into highly demanding, rebuilding processes that never seem to finish the job. As I have said before, it’s hard to fix an airplane in mid-flight. I like just shutting things down and finding the root cause.

I use athletes who ignore the above approach and just do their own thing as a cautionary tale. They are haunted and find themselves repeatedly nursing the same injury, often quitting the sport because of their stubbornness.

Nail the Coffin Shut

A period of rehab or reconditioning often allows athletes to play but isn’t long enough for them to play well. “Return to Play” should be renamed “Return to Playing Better.” Countless times athletes play meaningless games just to be back and feeling they are contributing. While the NFL is different, most sports schedules have some time to play with unless it’s the playoffs.

A vacation with spa-like activities to remove burnout and sneak in therapy is a good idea with college athletes or pros at the end of the season. The sports medicine room is too sterile, and athletes may need a change of scenery more than a change of programming. Getting outside, changing the environment, and sometimes even changing the faces is a good way to get out of a rut. The main take-home here is to complete the rehab and train injury-free to cement healthy functioning for the next season. Nothing drives me insane more than taking in a compromised athlete to start a season. Much of the general physical preparedness (GPP) I do is glorified high-volume conditioning with rudimentary therapy-like exercises in workaround sessions.

How do you know if the “coffin is nailed shut”? Simple. The athlete can undergo personal best-like training. The most moronic milestones in rehab are arbitrary calendars. Timelines are estimates, never promises. If athletes are only training at 80% at a time when their rehab is supposed to have been completed, that benchmark is not good enough. Success occurs when an athlete has returned to 100%. That means they do activities that made them a champ to begin with, not regressing to what looks like elderly fitness routines.

Don’t Google or Wiki Injuries

I now have a new rule: the internet is for entertainment, not self-diagnosis. In the past, a second opinion from another doctor was fine, provided they had all the relevant information. Even a third opinion, from a DPT, was valuable.

It may seem that everyone today consults online sources, sometimes sites selling e-book injury solutions and flooding the heads of athletes with supposed symptoms. Heavy training and chronic pain issues create phantom problems. The difference between chronic pain and re-injury is simple: Athletes may have symptoms of discomfort lingering long after the biomaterial is repaired, while re-injury occurs when the athlete suffers additional trauma to the same area.

With the internet and some coaches obsessed with dysfunctions, we see athletes thinking they have a labral tear when in reality they feel a little soreness from cutting in practice. Many of them hop online and see a lot of information that can create fears and potentially misleading timelines (how long it should take for a particular injury to get better), and this is frustrating.

My new rule is that if an injury occurs, athletes need to listen to the experts they are working with to create a commitment. If you are dealing with sensitive athletes—those always dealing with nagging issues—they are usually smart and rebellious. Talk to them and explain pain. Soreness is normal, and pain may be an indicator of an injury. But sometimes athletes are so pumped with adrenaline that they may be injured yet not know for days after.

While medical imaging is a mixed bag, real tissue disruption must be dealt with. Some things like a bulging disk are not issues to cry about, but that’s why sports medicine professionals must be good problem solvers. I like a combination of blood testing, HRV, PNS, and other evaluations to complement conventional evaluations. I have seen major injuries go undiagnosed because professionals didn’t listen to the athletes, and unnecessary surgeries performed because of chronic pain and “Wiki Warrior” athletes who were convinced they needed the procedure.

Lately, I have used a simple flow chart with head cases to direct their return to play. I give them options they feel comfortable with and explain why genuine, workable timetables are based on milestones and benchmarks rather than on calendar dates or important games. Athletes who want to play ASAP sabotage themselves by going to Google and deciding that they can’t do things, or they should do things that are usually not constructive. Coaches in team sports need to be educated about what to do. I suggest “If this, then that” type of decision-making processes, instead of planned therapy schemes that tend to be prescriptive without involving athlete inputs.

Control What You Can Control

The last mantra is about removing worries of future injuries, especially by doom-and-gloom coaches and medical professionals who scare athletes with compensation risks. True, athletes must be accountable, not doing freelance rehab with training on the side or therapy routines that slow down the process and plant bad seeds of what could go wrong. Athletes should focus on what they are responsible for now, not what fate might do to them down the road.

Sometimes the odds are stacked, and the gamblers’ fallacy is that patterns of luck change. Chronically injured athletes usually have lifestyle issues and attitudes that increase their risks. Changing those attitudes may help but are not winning lottery tickets for the future. The future is about managing risk, and past injuries increase injury rates based on the research. But the “new you” can significantly reduce those probabilities, and that is what people should spend their energies on.

When athletes get injured, much of the responsibility for dealing with that injury is out of their hands. An athlete can only control effort, focus, sleep, diet, and mindset, but they rarely drive the overall plan. Athletes feel that they have no control over their destiny, and that is true. Nobody has 100% control. A better angle of attack is to be 100% in control of their allotted responsibilities.

Final Thoughts on Injuries and Mindset

All these mantras are necessary components of successful reconditioning. Make sure they are integrated into the plan—or at least thought of—to make the return to play more successful. Rehab is not just a muscle or joint challenge; it’s also a person problem. While all athletes are different, they have commonalities we must face. Having a plan in place to face those mental hurdles is a great start to improving outcomes.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

By Chris Gallagher

This tweet from Mladen Jovanovic, football physiologist at ASPIRE Academy for Sports Excellence, and the responses it generated illustrate a subject many who work in competitive sports environments are pondering.

From my knowledge of institutes in the UK, any university can designate its student gym as a “high-performance” center, as if such a grandiose title gives the impression that anyone other than the BUCS (British Universities and College Sport) competing football team trains there. There are of course some genuine high-performance facilities attached to universities with elite athletes training there. However, that does not change the fact that many institutions abuse the title.

High performance is not something you can justify by simply giving yourself, your institution, or facility that title. So, is high performance about the equipment and facilities in which you work with your athletes? The latest equipment certainly adds value to your program. Having velocity-based training (VBT) tools like GymAware, Tendo, or Push Bands advance strength and power training in your gym. Guys like Bryan Mann, Dan Baker, and Mladen Jovanovic or his articles, “The future of Velocity Based Training” or “Velocity Based Strength Training” put out quality information on how these tools can enhance your athletes’ training programs.

Advanced GPS Systems such as Catapult provide coaches and sports scientists with a wide array of sports analytics information. Performance management systems such as Omegawave allow you to monitor training, holistic, and lifestyle stress and readiness to train so you can adjust your training program if need be.

You can go on and on about the wide array of different technologies constantly being developed and updated to offer anyone involved in athletic performance development all the information they could require. But coaches and athletes were achieving world-class performances in years gone by without all this data and information. So how could you fail to be high-performance today with access to all those gadgets and numbers?

Does having all this equipment automatically qualify you as high-performance? No. Can you be high-performance without this stuff? Yes. Don’t get me wrong. Of course, it is awesome to have access to these tools, high-level facilities, the latest treadmills, running tracks, properly maintained courts and fields, and so forth. But not having it is not a barrier to high performance and excelling in competition.

Are the latest greatest, biggest, and brightest new types of equipment and facilities a prerequisite of high performance?

High performance is about much more than the name and facilities and equipment. It is not merely about capturing data. As many have said before me, collecting data has no value unless you utilize it properly. Are you monitoring athletes’ progress to gauge how your program is working for them, or to adjust future training practices? Spreadsheets, folders, and filing cabinets full of numbers are useless unless they impact your coaching.

Why is it so hard to understand that data without context is just a collection of random numbers.

— Vern Gambetta (@coachgambetta) September 11, 2015

What, then, is a real high-performance environment? To me, it consists of three simple, yet major facets: people, philosophies, and culture.

People

People are, or should be, your greatest commodity, your greatest resource in a high-performance environment. Talented, driven, inquisitive and ambitious people are essential You should never lose sight of the fact that people are at the center of everything when it comes to high performance.

Nice amenities do not cultivate talent … hardship does. – Brett Bartholomew

People use facilities as an excuse when in reality it is a failure of creativity. – Dan Pfaff

Learned, experienced, and forward-thinking coaches. Talented athletes with the right blend of innate physical gifts and psychological makeup: the right character, openness to coaching, discipline, and willingness to work hard. Support staff with the skills and knowledge to augment the training process, enhance the delivery of programs to athletes, and complement the coach–athlete relationship. All these people are far more important than equipment and facilities. World-class coaches working with top athletes can produce world-class performances with only basic equipment and facilities. The reverse does not necessarily hold true. Producing a high-performance environment with elite facilities but without world-class people is virtually impossible.

Philosophy

While you must attract, recruit, and hire elite performers in all areas of your organization, that is only the start. Once you have the right people in the right positions, you need to educate them, develop them, and allow them to grow. This must be a basic tenet of your overarching philosophy.

Many coaches have a very large toolbox but cannot decide what to do because they don’t have a philosophy. – Dan Pfaff

Dan Pfaff has 40 years’ experience at the sharp end of sport, including helping Olympic long jump champion Greg Rutherford complete a clean sweep of major titles by winning the World Championships in Beijing in August (Fabrice Lapierre, also coached by Dan, took silver).

High-performance environments produce high-performance results.

Working out of Phoenix, Arizona-based Altis, Dan believes successful coaches require a governing philosophy. How can you generate logical, sensible, and effective programs and adapt them to the chaotic environments of elite sport and human physiology and psychology without a defining philosophy?

Dan recently summed up his philosophy: “Training should be enjoyable, educational, and mechanically efficient.” All coaches need a similar guiding philosophy. They should be able to define it in relatively simple terms, clearly and precisely.

In an interview, UK-based sports scientist and strength and conditioning specialist John Kiely also advocated the benefits and necessity of a coaching philosophy underpinning everything you do: “Your background philosophy steers all training designs and decisions: it should be a fusion of all your experiences and learning. If you want it to be robust, you need to invest time and energy; you need to evolve it.”

You get pretty consistent messages coming out of Phoenix (though the guys at Altis are not afraid to disagree with each other). Stuart McMillan also champions the need for a coaching philosophy in his excellent series of articles, “A Coaches’ Guide to Strength Development.” I strongly recommend the entire series.

“Good coaches are better able to learn from history—because they have a philosophy,” he says, and adds that “a philosophy protects from the comings and goings of the various trends that permeate the profession. Good coaches maintain a core set of principles—and are far less influenced by the current trends of the day.”

Stuart records his philosophy annually, restricting himself to a single side of paper. Being that exact and precise allows him to dial in on what is really important. Stuart identified his major principles as

1. Mastery of the Basics
2. The Planning Trap
3. Micro dictates Macro

If one line sums up mastery of the basics, it is this—consistent application of the fundamentals. Only through applying consistent stimuli and analyzing the results can you make more confident predictions of how athletes will respond and adapt to current and future training.

Emotional attachment to a painstakingly prepared training program is what Stuart terms the planning trap. Coaches often write these detailed plans weeks and months ahead of being carried out. Devoting so much time and energy to constructing an intricate plan makes it difficult for the emotionally attached coach to deviate in the midst of delivering it, according to the physical and emotional state of athletes and how they are responding.

McMillan’s micro-organization has certain repeating fixtures throughout each cycle. For example, Monday is potentiation day, followed by acceleration day on Tuesday. There is little variation in the program in terms of structure and loading in relative terms. So in this way the micro dictates the macro.

Altis, therefore, is the very definition of a high-performance environment, with their athletes picking up five medals at the World Championships in August. Hopefully, these examples highlighting the emphasis they put on creating a guiding philosophy show how vitally important it is to operate as a high-performance coach within a high-performance environment.

Culture

The remaining vital facet in operating a truly high-performance program is culture. Culture encapsulates the ethos, values, principles, and beliefs of the people and the environment as a whole. Culture can be a powerful driver in your organization by instilling a subconscious driver of desirable behavior among everyone involved in the program.

Build a program and a culture that is built on positive expectation and accountability. – Chidi Enyia, sprints coach, Southern Illinois.

Rugby fans are fully aware of the culture of the All Blacks, the New Zealand national rugby team with probably the best all-time winning percentage of any team, a staggering 78%!. That percentage has climbed to 84% since the sport went professional. Part of the reason a team from such a small country (population 4 million compared to 50+ million in England) can be so dominant in the Rugby Union is its culture.

All Blacks Captain Richie McCaw and Coach Graham Henry celebrate winning the 2011 World Cup. Culture plays a critical role in their unparalleled success.

For a sports team littered with superstars, there is a humility, dedication to hard work and doing what needs to be done. “Ego has to be left at the door; there is a rigidly enforced ‘no d—head policy’ in the squad, and every player takes turns in sweeping the changing room clean after each game,” says assistant coach Gilbert Enoka. Players themselves—not just the coaches—enforce standards. Players who transgress are answerable to their teammates.

The All Black mantra is “leave the jersey in a better place.” There is strict accountability and responsibility. The team, the jersey, and the role models they are required to be stand far above and beyond the needs or wants of the individual. This is an exceptional culture at work.

Culture drives Habits
Habits drive Behavior
Behavior drives Results!
– Alan Stein

Working in an established high-performance culture is one thing, but what about developing your own culture? Brett Bartholomew often extols the importance of creating a culture. In this article, he discusses his views on nurturing the right culture. In the gym and in training, athletes must move with a “violent grace.” He links the explosive intent of a squat or Olympic lift to a sprinter exploding out of the blocks or a throwing athlete launching their chosen implement to their training—in every case, bringing a focused intent to the work they are doing.

Brett remarks that there are many painters but few artists in coaching. Many coaches have all the paintbrushes and color palettes but cannot paint a picture. Starting the session with the “why”— the desired outcomes of the session and their relevance—brings the painting to life for the athlete. This idea is reinforced at the end of the session by helping the athlete to identify and understand what just took place.

This ties in neatly with Dan Pfaff’s coaching philosophy and the overall philosophy of athlete education at Altis. Altis proves that high performance is not about equipment and facilities. They utilize a University track and rent the strength and conditioning suite. Altis coaches expect athletes to “become PhDs in their sport.”

This approach can be summed up by Altis founder John Godina: “My only hope is that we can continue to be able to help everybody that could possibly want help from us; it is a good problem to have when your biggest concern is being able to keep up with the demand. I work hard to make sure our coaches and administrative team have everything inline for what they need, so they feel like they are pursuing what they love to do the best way possible. If we take care of our people, then I know that the athletes will always have a great place to be.”

Altis provides graphic evidence that people, philosophy, and culture are the key pillars to a high-performance environment. These three elements are intertwined, difficult to separate, and there is a great deal of overlap. How much does one drive the others? It is a bit of a chicken and the egg situation. Good people with strong, enlightened and efficient philosophies drive a positive and effective culture but each pillar reinforces and develops the other.

Please share this article so others may benefit.

Photo courtesy Tony Duffy.

By Nick Newman, MS

Developing elite horizontal jumpers is not easy. Managing the physiological, psychological, technical, and tactical requirements needed for success is a long-term holistic process.

This article is the first of a series laying out my ever-evolving blueprint for working with horizontal jumpers. It offers an overview of my recommendations as coaches and athletes plan their training program. The remaining articles will discuss these components in greater detail and begin building the comprehensive program.

Recommendations for Long-Term Planning

I approach programming from the perspective of broad to narrow. Understanding big-picture principles provides essential bases for successful day-to-day practices.

Here are five recommendations in addressing long-term development:

1. Elite athletes must keep general training to a minimum. Gone are the days when building an “aerobic base” and regarding it as beneficial to specific development was acceptable. General work can enhance recovery and aid in injury prevention but shouldn’t be developed beyond what is absolutely necessary.
2. You should address specific training and technical development all season long. This includes continually using the most important exercises and best training methods.
3. Generally speaking, “less is more” in most aspects of training. Elite jumpers respond best to greater intensity and lesser volume. Much of the literature—especially regarding plyometric training—emphasizes volume far too much.
4. Training quality is the most important aspect of programming and planning. You should monitor daily sessions for all specific exercises. The target is always the highest-quality speed and power expression. The session or particular exercise should stop when the outcome drops below desirable levels.
5. With specific training continually present in some form, it is important to think in terms of emphasis shifts rather than rigidly focused training blocks. Done correctly, emphasis shifts provide seamless transitions throughout the year.

Recommendations for Speed Development

Horizontal jumps are speed-dominant events. Speed-based programs have been highly successful in developing the best jumpers in the world. Approach speed can determine up to 95% of the distance achieved and, therefore, remains the single most important quality a jumper can develop.

Of the two jumps, the long jump requires greater approach speed. With the need for stability and control, the triple jump involves slightly lower speeds. Programming for speed development is a multi-dimensional process involving many moving parts. While perfecting the skill aspect of sprinting requires considerable repetition, the inclusion of complementary training makes continued speed development possible.

Here are five recommendations for speed development:

1. Speed development should be related to the long- or triple-jump approach for the majority of the year. You can start approach development as early as the first specific phase and continue to implement it for the rest of the season. Rhythmic approach running at a sub-max pace is a great way to begin. Athletes’ rhythm and feel during the approach run will significantly improve their ability to generate higher speeds.
2. You should emphasize maximum velocity sprinting mechanics from day one. Coaches often ignore max velocity work until late in the preparation period. Few training methods have a more significant impact on max velocity ability than practicing the skill itself. Therefore, it is essential to devote as much time to sprinting skill as to strength- or power-related exercises.
3. Intensity and technique are the cornerstones of a speed training program. Athletes need to do accelerations and max velocity sprinting at or near 100% effort followed by maximum recovery periods. Stop the session when fatigue compromises technique and performance.
4. Acceleration sessions typically consisting of sprints less than 40m in length and a total of 300m should be employed all year. Successful methods for acceleration development include hill sprints, sled sprints, plyometric combination sprints, and medicine-ball throwing to sprinting variations.
5. Long speed endurance development plays a key role in developing a relaxed sprinting style and enhancing the jumper’s ability to move with ease during high-velocity takeoff. However, many high school and college programs overuse speed endurance training. Overdevelopment of this quality is to the detriment of more important qualities such as speed, strength, and power.

Recommendations for the Approach Run

As vital as speed development is for a horizontal jumper, it is during the approach run where all can either be gained or lost. Technical elements of the approach run include rhythm, timing, consistency, and accuracy. All require considerable attention within the training program.

Full-approach practice also plays a vital role in developing the specific strength and power requirements for high-speed takeoffs. This is the only possible type of practice that can develop such qualities.

Here are five recommendations to plan for and develop the approach run:

1. The starting method—whether a run-in, walk-in, or standing start—should be consistent. Developing an effective approach means practicing it the same way every time. The rhythm and feel of the approach must become second nature.
2. Use a check mark for the third stride (6 steps) because fouling issues are related in large part to errors during those first three strides. By hitting the same mark every time on the third stride, the athlete controls this section of the approach and, therefore, helps to minimize error later on.
3. Use the same number of running strides every time, ideally 16–24 depending on the athlete’s speed and strength. Once the optimum approach distance has been established, it should always be practiced the same way. Consider extending young athletes’ approach when they have improved speed, strength, power AND technical proficiency at higher speeds. A long jumper who relies more on vertical velocity than horizontal velocity may use a slightly shorter approach.
4. Ideally an athlete will use a relaxed and progressive acceleration pattern during the approach run. An approach is only successful if it helps the transition to an effective takeoff. Therefore, timing, rhythm, and posture are essential throughout.
5. Reach optimal takeoff speed roughly five meters from the board and maintain this speed. Until this point, velocity should be gradually increasing. During the final 5m the jumper begins to prepare for takeoff.

Recommendations for Technical Sessions

Technical jump and approach sessions generally make up a large chunk of a jumper’s training program. They provide an essential link between all other training components and event-specific performance. These sessions provide far more than just a technical stimulus. For example, there is not a more specific plyometric action for the long jumper than actually long jumping. These sessions are extremely important on many levels and should be a priority for coaches and athletes.

Here are five recommendations for planning and implementing technical sessions:

1. Technical sessions don’t always involve jumping into the pit. However, they should remain specific to the technical requirements of the event. They are the highlight of the week for many jumpers and ideally occur after a rest day or a short speed/power day.
2. Technical sessions can emphasize the following:
   • Approach rhythm/timing/posture
   • Approach speed/top-speed mechanics
   • Penultimate stride action—roll, push, and extension
   • Takeoff plant—extend, fast paw down and back, push, and extend
   • Free-leg action—parallel thigh block, lower leg tucked under, hips forward
   • Flight—tall and long body throughout
   • Landing—hips and feet far forward with feet together. Dig heels down into sand and pull with hamstrings
3. Three effective tools you can use during technical sessions and their specific purposes:
   • Place a low/medium hurdle 1–2 meters past the takeoff board. The goal is reaching the hurdle with free leg knee drive before leaving the takeoff board. Helps with board penetration and takeoff angle.
   • Penultimate step plant on a 2–3-inch board/box. Provides greater eccentric load during takeoff plant.
   • Place string/rope at the landing spot/goal. Reaching past a visible marker during landing improves foot placement and correct body positioning.
4. Athletes must develop the skill of board accuracy during each session. Board accuracy has two components. The first is physiological, and the second is a skill-based technical issue. A learning concept called Practice Variability may be beneficial in this regard. It can take many forms in relation to the horizontal jumps. Here are a few examples:
   • Systematically or randomly alternate varying stride numbers during jump attempts and aim for the same board position strike
   • Slightly alter starting position (+/-30cm) and aim for the same board position strike
   • Use cluster sets of approach stride numbers, followed by alternating random number of strides during short approach jumps
   • Use random approach length with unknown stride number and aim to strike the board accurately
   • Respond to specific directions for targeting the board in a random fashion (short, long, 3 inches past the board, etc.)
5. These technical drills can benefit jumpers’ development:
   • Standing penultimate—penultimate leg bent at knee up, land with heel lead, roll on and off foot
   • Continuous knee drive drill—drive free leg knee up and down with support leg stiff-hopping forward
   • 1-step takeoffs—continuous takeoffs with 1 running step in between
   • 3-step takeoffs—continuous takeoffs with 3 running steps in between
   • 5-step takeoffs —continuous takeoffs with 5 running steps in between
   • Alternate easy skip/aggressive skip—drive knee on aggressive skip like a takeoff
   • Power skips—alternate jumps working on knee drives
   • Mini-hurdle takeoffs—work on penetration past hurdle
   • High hurdle takeoffs—work on vertical components of jump
   • Penultimate step-box drill—run penultimate off low box onto takeoff and jump
   • S/L depth takeoff—drop from low box into takeoff action
   • S/L depth takeoff with preceding running strides—as above with a run onto the box
   • Short run jumps, w/wo landing, w/wo weight vest—4, 6, 8, 10, 12, etc. strides
   • Rhythm runs approach work—using 70–80% of speed
   • Rhythm runs with a pop-up—70–80% runs with a pop-up at end

Recommendations for the Weight Room

Weight training is an important and highly individual aspect of the training program. It requires a great deal of consideration and planning. Strength can provide a base for a body resilient to injury and an explosive body capable of generating great force. You should implement special guidelines to ensure that your strength program targets the needs of each athlete. A strength program implemented incorrectly can have an adverse effect.

Here are five recommendations for designing a strength training program:

1. Spend the early years of specialized development increasing maximum strength levels, primarily in the squat, step-up, lunge, and pulling movements. As a rule of thumb, a full squat of 2x body weight, power clean of 1.5x, power snatch of 1.3x, and parallel step-up of 1.5x are optimal. These are general guidelines and not necessary for athletes with excellent high-velocity qualities. The sooner athletes attain optimal maximum strength, the sooner they can focus on special strength training. You should plan a brief session for maximum strength maintenance every ten days or so.
2. The most important qualities for a jumper are elastic and reactive strength and high-speed strength. Special strength should be developed through high-velocity and maximum effort repetitions using exercises such as jump squats, hang power cleans, hang power snatches, and squatting exercises using pneumatic machines.
3. Relatively low-cost technology helps determine power output and velocity during certain exercises. I recommend using it to determine optimal power training loads for your athletes and provide information about session quality. Track the quality of performance during every session whenever possible. If the desired power output or velocity is no longer possible because of fatigue, an alteration to the session needs to occur. Remember my earlier recommendations: quality over quantity and less is often more.
4. There is a negative relationship between the development of maximum strength and special strength in advanced jumpers. It is a common mistake for coaches to place a huge emphasis on heavy loads in the weight room for the majority of the year. The saying “Strong is never strong enough” is simply not true for high-velocity speed/power athletes.
5. Strength training programs for jumpers often include bodybuilding-style circuits. Typically they occur on low-intensity days and are used for general strength. These circuits are unnecessary for many male athletes. Female athletes who will likely never gain upper-body bulk can incorporate them. General strength routines for jumpers should focus mainly on the rotation core, lower back, feet and ankles, and lateral moving lower body exercises.

Recommendations for Plyometric Training

Plyometric or jump training is a popular method of training. It can elicit tremendous neuromuscular responses by providing great stimulus in the form of extremely fast eccentric-concentric muscular contractions. You might argue that this is the most specific form of strength/power training. This exact muscular loading sequence is replicated during all aspects of horizontal jumping events and, therefore, plyometric training benefits these athletes.

As with most high-intensity training methods, plyometrics can be regarded as high-risk/high-reward. Careful programming with correct technique, progressions, and exercise choices is especially important.

Here are five recommendations for including plyometric training:

1. The speed at which a muscle is lengthened during the stretch-shortening cycle is a key aspect of successful plyometrics. The greater the rate of stretch, the greater the resultant force during the subsequent contraction. No matter the level or intensity of the plyometric exercise being performed, athletes need to approach each repetition with this concept in mind.
2. A recommended plyometric progression for developing jumpers:
   • Standing multi-jumps
   • Linear/lateral multi-jumps
   • Skipping variations
   • Hopping variations
   • Bounding variations
   • Basic low- to high-box single-depth jumps
   • Multi-box depth jumps
   • S/L depth jumps
   • S/L depth jumps with run in
3. Generally speaking, I don’t recommend an intensive plyometric-based program for elite jumpers. By the nature of their event, triple jumpers require a high ability to perform specific plyometric actions such as hopping and bounding. Their overall program should differ from long jumpers, high jumpers, and pole vaulters, who only require a single maximal-effort takeoff action. Plyometric training should reflect specific event requirements and it is important to understand that a jumper’s technical training should be included when assessing plyometric load.
4. Depth-jump height is an important discussion point. It is wise to progress gradually the box heights at the pace by which the athlete increases his/her rebounding ability. Adapting to a new box height may take several sessions, so do not immediately return to the previous box if rebounding height suddenly decreases.
5. Plyometric/jump training should include a variety of landing methods to develop stretch reflexes and eccentric abilities. Almost all the plyometric progressions listed above can be performed with a static landing/pause. This method is great for developing stability and eccentric strength. Both flat foot and ball of the foot contacts should be used during depth jumps to mimic sprinting and takeoff actions.

Recommendations for Readiness, Recovery, and Restoration

No training program can succeed without carefully monitoring the three Rs: Readiness, Recovery, and Restoration. The human body can only withstand so much. With athletes and coaches wanting to push the limits of human performance, understanding the holistic view of health and recovery becomes vital. Developing optimal health with performance is a difficult process that may take several minds to master. Ice bags and ibuprofen aren’t enough to compete at the highest level any longer. Health and high performance require full-time monitoring, evaluating, and adapting to be optimized.

Here are five recommendations for approaching Readiness, Recovery, and Restoration:

1. Readiness, Recovery, and Restoration is a 24/7/365 consideration. Health maintenance encompasses a vast array of components: the amount of quality sleep, the variety of organic quality food, the management of various stressors, and more. Serious athletes need to consider everything they do as it all can have a positive or negative impact on their health. Their health habits contribute greatly to their ability to benefit from their training routines and recover from them.
2. Readiness, Recovery, and Restoration are enhanced through proper warming up and cooling down. A thorough and well-designed warmup and cool-down program is easy to achieve but often is a neglected aspect of the daily training routine. Warmup and cool-down should be progressive and cover non-specific and specific movement patterns and muscle groups. Both are great places to incorporate general strength routines and general fitness work.
3. Following the above points allows the body to utilize its natural healing process and become highly efficient at dealing with positive and negative stressors. The better the human body is at this, the more comprehensive it will be at optimizing performance.
4. Water immersion techniques aid the recovery process. Twenty minutes neck-deep in a swimming pool daily or every other day is ideal. Light mobility exercises can be performed during each pool session. A number of successful jumps programs feature a 1-to-1 ratio of land sessions to pool sessions.
5. A rarely used set up of an 8-10 day cycle allows you to spread out the training elements over a longer period. By taking your current 7-day program and including one or two lower load days you are enhancing the adaptation process. Not only does this set up add more recovery days, it also allows for higher training loads to be used during specific days. This can be especially effective when working with older athletes.

Bookmark and share this article so other jump coaches and athletes may benefit.

By Ellie Kulick and Dr. Rebecca Shultz Ph.D., Lumo Bodytech

As runners, we’re often looking for ways to improve our pace, our mileage, and our form. It’s a constant battle between reaching our goals and avoiding injury that would restrict our training for weeks, or maybe even months.

If this resonates with you, I’d like to introduce you to Lumo Run: a recently launched pair of smart running shorts by Lumo Bodytech that helps runners improve performance as well as decrease the risk of injury through capturing and measuring key running biomechanics to provide actionable feedback during and after every run.

Video 1. Overview of the Lumo Run wearable sensor.

To fully understand the benefits Lumo Run brings to your everyday run, it’s crucial to understand the role biomechanics play in helping you become a better runner.

Running Biomechanics

Running biomechanics refers to the mechanical laws relating to movement and structure of our bodies when running. In other words, it looks at how we run through focusing on aspects like how our muscles and joints function while running. These include familiar terms like foot strike patterns, pelvic movements, ground contact time, stride length, and others; it is essentially a deep-dive analysis of your running form.

Out of more than 15 biomechanical measures that the Lumo Run can capture, six metrics have been identified to most significantly affect your running form. Lumo has worked with leading running research institutions, such as the team lead by Dr. Jonathan Folland of Loughborough University (UK) and Dr. Rebecca Shultz Ph.D., who has dedicated seven years at Stanford University Human Performance Lab, to identify these key metrics.

• Cadence: how frequently your foot contacts the ground every minute.
• Bounce: the vertical displacement of your body while you run.
• Ground Contact Time: the amount of time your foot stays on the ground during each step.
• Braking: the decrease in speed your body experiences on each step.
• Stride Length: the distance between the initial ground contact of one foot to when that same foot hits the ground again.
• Pelvic Rotation: how much your pelvis tilts on three axes. It is a measure of how stable your core is.

These metrics are important to running because there lie valuable insight and data that can tell you how to run better, how to reduce your risk of injury, what area needs improvement, and what to do to fix it. While there may be no such thing as one perfect form for everyone (at least none that has been identified), there is bad form, and we have a pretty good idea of what poor running biomechanics looks like.

For example, a low cadence value, a long stride length value and increased braking are often an indicator that you may be over-striding and are overloading your hips and knees, putting yourself at risk of injury. In this case, increasing your cadence while maintaining the same pace could help reduce the risk of injury and help you run more efficiently.

Another example is bounce — otherwise known as vertical displacement. A high bounce value when running is an indicator of inefficient running, as you’re wasting valuable energy on up and down movements, rather than smoothly moving forward to maximize speed and distance. To minimize inefficient energy expenditure, focus on pushing off of your foot with each step so that you propel yourself forward.

While each metric is extremely important in the study of running biomechanics, as research advances and focuses change, new trends begin to appear on what is considered the holy grail of running.

The Latest in the Field

Until recently, the focus for runners, researchers, coaches, and experts alike, was on foot strike – whether you are a forefoot runner, midfoot striker, or the controversial heel-striker. There’ve been many studies and debates on the topic of the best way to contact the ground and how “we’re all doing it wrong” in terms of preventing injuries, running faster, or farther.

Now, the focus has shifted a little further up the kinetic chain to our pelvis (specifically pelvic movement), as well as to over-striding, a far too common cause of injury for many runners.

Pelvic Rotation

The pelvis is the starting point for all movements. It makes sense – both from an injury prevention standpoint and an enhancing performance standpoint – to pay more attention to our pelvic movement as we run. Physical therapist and coach, David McHenry explains:

“The foot is just the end of a big kinetic whip–the leg. Core and hips are where every runner should be starting if they are concerned with optimizing their form, maximizing their speed and minimizing injury potential.”

Pelvic stability is the measure of the movement of our pelvis on three separate planes: sagittal, coronal, and transverse, which correspond to tilt, drop, and rotation, respectively.

Pelvic Tilt. Most effectively seen from the side of the runner; it is the movement of our pelvis on the sagittal plane. Try sticking your butt in and out to feel what an exaggerated pelvic tilt movement feels like.

Pelvic Drop. A common affliction of unevenly developed and weak muscles and levels of flexibility; it is most effectively seen from the front (or rear) of the runner. To get a sense of what this movement looks like, try swinging your hips from side to side.

Pelvic Rotation. Much like its name, this is the movement of your pelvis from left to right (or clockwise and anti-clockwise). Often an issue for over-striders or misalignment, a large pelvic rotation is an indication of driving your stride by throwing one side of your hip forward rather than pushing off of your foot.

Of the three pelvic rotation movements, the two most problematic ones are tilt and drop; tilt has everything to do with your posture and back strain, and pelvic drop has to do with pressure on your knees as you land. These are most likely to be the cause of injury to the back and knees for runners.

Tips for Improvement

Unlike cadence, which is fairly easy to control as a runner, pelvic rotation tends to be more of a challenge because it’s difficult to conceptualize such a subtle movement on a central location of our bodies without external eyes on you (i.e., a coach).

Here are a few coaching cues from the Lumo Run coaching model to help you reduce all three pelvic movements during your run:

• Imagine you are preparing for a punch to the stomach and keep your abs engaged. This will help reduce pelvic tilt.
• Picture a finish line ahead of you and that you are about to cross it. When crossing, lead with your hips. This will help reduce pelvic tilt, as well as rotation.
• While running, try to maintain a 2-inch window between your knees. This will help stop your legs from crossing over, and reduce pelvic drop.

Over-Striding

Another area of focus in recent biomechanics research is over-striding. When trying to run faster, we tend to fall into a nasty habit of controlling speed by increasing our stride length rather than increasing our step count. It is one of the most commonly seen form faux-pas for runners, and it’s also one of the most common causes of injury. So what does it mean?

Overstriding is when your foot comes into contact with the ground in front of your center of mass (or your pelvis). Another way coaches describe it is when your tibia (lower leg bone) comes in contact with the ground at an obtuse angle — rather than perpendicular to the ground, as it should be. The ideal is always to land with your foot directly under your body and not in front.

How Should My Foot Land When Running

Take a look at Meb Keflezighi from the 2010 Boston Marathon. Notice how his stride length is of an incredible distance, but each time his foot hits the ground, his legs are at a nearly 90-degree angle and his pelvis, as with the rest of his body, is directly above his foot.

Video 2. Slow motion gait of a marathon runner.

When you’re running, each step you take is already loaded with tremendous force from your body-weight and the speed at which you are coming in contact with the ground. This is amplified in all of the wrong places when you over stride, as all of that impact is transferred at an angle through your foot that loads the hip and knee and puts your body at high risk of injury.

In 2011, Dr. Bryan Heiderscheit, a now famous expert on overstriding, showed in his study that overstriding is tied to a high bounce value. The longer the stride on each step, the higher you have to jump in the air, which results in excessive vertical movement of your body while you run and a harder impact as you hit the ground. Not only is excessive bounce another common cause of injury, but it’s also an inefficient way to run as you waste your energy moving up and down rather than smoothly forward.

Tips for Improvement

When trying to fix over-striding, the quick and dirty solution is to increase your cadence — otherwise known as steps per minute. But coaches and experts alike caution against sudden and drastic changes to your running form, as this could result in far worse injuries than the form you are trying to correct.

If you know you are an over-strider, try slowly increasing your cadence by five to ten percent of your preferred cadence at a time. A study by Cavanagh and Williams (1982) found that most runners select a cadence and stride length combination that reduces their metabolic cost (a measure of energy and how tired you feel). Suddenly increasing your cadence over the recommended ten percent requires a large metabolic cost and tires you out a lot quicker – which makes it difficult to run in good form.

Here is a Lumo Run coaching cue you can use to increase your cadence while out on your next run:

“Imagine you are running through a puddle and you are trying to make as little splash as possible. This will help you quicken your steps, reduce ground impact and shorten your stride.”

Breaking Ground

We’ve talked a great deal about running biomechanics and the importance of the insight it can give runners into their running form for improving performance and reducing the risk of injury. The challenge, however, has not been to accept its importance, but rather an accessibility to this kind of sophisticated, lab-grade data.

It’s one thing to be mindful of not overstriding, or trying to run smoothly forward without bouncing, but there hasn’t been a way for runners to know their exact pelvic rotation value on a specific run, or what their bounce was like at mile two.

One of the ways Lumo Run is breaking ground in the running community is by making this running biomechanics data accessible to you every time you go out for a run. Through the small sensor embedded in the waistband of the Lumo Run running shorts, it captures key running metrics to coach you to run faster, farther and decrease your risk of injury.

Lumo Run is available for pre-order now at Lumo Bodytech.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

Here is my first annual review. Based on email and Twitter exchanges, it features my most requested solutions to monitoring and recovery issues. Usually, I do things like this at the end of the year in December, but I’d like to get an early start.

Pros and Cons of Jump Testing

The paradox of jump testing is that those not doing jump training usually need testing, while those jumping too much need conventional strength training. The NBA strangely has a high adoption rate for force plates. This is not a bad thing, but some perspective is needed in the realities of pro and elite college programs and youth academy studies with lower-level athletes.

Jump testing requires a maximal effort, and that doesn’t happen when athletes are bored or sore. They can be fresh and explosive, but the data is muddy if they have been doing jump testing for a while and dealing with residual joint soreness. On the other hand, jump testing provides direct information. Many systems estimating fatigue from physiological measures are secondary but still have a place. To know if an athlete can do something, you need to just do it and see.

Monitoring Procedures: Test without load and with load only when you can control the set-up and conditions. Athletes need to be somewhat rested, and testing for bodyweight should be no less than quarterly. Twice a month is sufficient to get basic trends with loaded jump motions like the Raptor Test. While residual fatigue from training suppresses some metrics, the goal is improving year to year, not test to test.

HRV at the Arena Versus at Home

Mobile options that test athletes remotely and give high-quality data are good options. Testing at home upon awakening removes many variables and is improving thanks to the options of camera sensors with smartphones, but most teams don’t experience anywhere near 80% daily compliance with home testing.

Figure 1. The ithlete Pro system for mobile testing of elite and recreational athletes.

Team testing requires everyone to be at the same place at the same time, and a lot can happen between the time someone wakes up and arrives at the practice facility. Compliance rates are higher, but the data value is mixed. Also, test duration is longer, as athletes must stabilize their arousal and heart rate.

Obviously HRV monitoring has value but repeatability and validity are different, and simply repeating something in the arena doesn’t mean data integrity is high. Regardless, you should add subjective questionnaires, so follow-up questions hopefully can tease out false positives and negatives.

Monitoring Procedures: Have an organization policy of expectations. On-location team testing can be a nightmare if it’s not standardized and valid. Subjective questionnaires can align triage therapy from smartphone apps and services, and HRV can be captured using a Buchheit approach or peaceful relaxation method. Offer a combined score to those who do home testing, so team chemistry isn’t split between home-testers and those who test at the facility.

Understanding the Biological Strain Index

Internal response is the biochemical and molecular event following external loading from training and competition. It’s hard to limit training to what someone does when the reality is that the combination of what someone does and how they respond is a recovery metric. Athletes who can do more and do it again faster technically have more recovery ability, and you can make a case that it is a sign of durability. One way to calibrate physiological monitoring options is periodic blood testing, to see how athletes respond to systematic and quantified external loads.

Figure 2. The InsideTracker Pro system for managing large groups of athletes or users, showing the categories of risk for teams.

Five key biomarkers are creatine kinase, hs-CRP, total testosterone, SHBG, and cortisol. Done periodically, these simple tests show why some athletes are Wolverine and others Mr. Glass. Creatine kinase can estimate muscular breakdown, hs-CRP can detect inflammation, and hormones can look at overall stress and fatigue.

Figure 3. An InsideTracker user account showcasing the free testosterone to cortisol ratio.

Monitoring Procedures: Do a blood test in every phase of the season: pre-season screen, early season follow-up, mid-season trends, and post-season analysis. Monthly is ideal, but logistics may dictate a different frequency. Test two days after an intense bout of training or competition, or during peak restoration recovery cycles. Merge HRV, GPS, and sleep data to determine correlations and perhaps causation.

GPS in American Football

With a field that resembles a giant ruler and plays that are usually scripted, American football might seem an unlikely candidate for GPS monitoring. True, the general idea of training volume is not a mystery. But GPS monitoring is much more than total distance; it’s about the fine details of cutting and re-acceleration combined with displacement. When coaches are buying into player tracking, they are estimating the wear and tear and convenience of getting that data.

One of the biggest problems is peak velocity interpretation and acceleration scores. The issue with football is that maximal velocity doesn’t happen. Estimating work with linemen is especially hard because they are displacing the least. More importantly, team coaches often are the least educated in understanding the metabolic demands of practices and training. As a result, most of the time GPS is used to try to tame the sheer work rates to do less. Is it working? Yes, but nobody has the magic recipe now. Creating a better model is possible.

Monitoring Procedures: The constraint of football is that practice is very timing-oriented. Unless one is walking through, speed is never going to be 60-75%. The total volume of practice and training and the variability are more important than high velocities. The goals are twofold: finding a weekly setup that allows position coaches to get on the same page and leave some energy in the bank for strength coaches for lifting, and providing a more precise weekly setup than simply minutes of work.

Sleep Monitoring Guidelines

Sleep monitoring is hot right now, but people need to cool off. Without athlete buy-in, infographics and guest lectures from sleep science researchers don’t result in improvements. Most athletes know you can fly with the eagles during the day if you run with the turkeys at night. The hard issue is getting data of what they are doing as well as the details of sleeping over time. Athletes are willing to train harder, but sacrificing time or the social and romantic fun of the evening is hard.

Currently, coaches want to get an idea on sleep devices so they can budget an enterprise option. Think about this for a minute. Sleep data involves 365 nights, and coaches have to get sub-metrics (duration, quality, and chronicity details) with entire rosters. The daily grind of simply managing sleep and follow-up questions makes even the theoretical idea of handling sleep a big task. Many teams claim they are getting sleep data. But just ask them if they have a team report beyond subjective responses, and usually those pundits are quiet.

Monitoring Procedures: The data points should focus on where the athlete is sleeping, the rhythm of waking and sleep times, the duration in bed, the duration of sleep, and its quality. Don’t bother creating sleep scores versus just the raw data. Share annual data for perspective so the 2-week “flash study” is exposed as nothing more than a stunt.

Using Ice or Ice Baths

Ice baths (cold water immersion, or CWI) and icing after competition or training have attracted a lot of attention in recent years, even though both appear to retard the regeneration of the body. Even their medical use after trauma is being scrutinized—for good reason, as some research shows cellular impairment in remodeling.

Figure 4. Professional soccer player Jamie Rodriguez attempting to recover in a tub of unknown temperature. Cold water immersion isn’t usually a good option for athletes.

So why does professional sport continue to ice and hop in the cold tub? Cold therapy or icing doesn’t fix anything though they create an analgesic-like response without the risks of some medications. Nobody with a college degree in sport science thinks muscles grow faster from cold; it’s just that they feel better after being beat up. With the frequency of training sometimes too high, the muting of the stimulus isn’t going to matter if the sessions are timed properly. Still, having people doing cold after practices raises questions of whether the training is appropriate. Even after injuries I focus more on lymphatic pumping and other options than icing, but some research shows possible benefits of cryotherapy on heavy trauma.

Some HRV research asks if CWI and the perception of feeling better may be good for tournaments and heavy competition schedules, but I think morning sessions are fine in-season. I have done biopsy work and all being equal, see no advantages to those who remove cold therapy from their routines. Most studies simply don’t replicate a multi-session program.

Regeneration Protocol: The only time ice makes sense occurs when the world of professional sport moves toward walking wounded. I still find pool sessions to be more valuable, and if one is injured or competing short, one needs to move from managing to medical interventions. CWI can be done the following morning before a warm-up, as the timing doesn’t influence the biological adaptation muting that some people fear. I suggest reading The Science of Running by Steve Magness to understand the theoretical model of periodizing recovery strategies.

Sauna Sessions and Recovery

Heat is gaining interest from teams attempting to hack the plasma volume benefits and HRV changes from sauna work. Some teams train in the heat and purposely try to dehydrate players to get their bodies to increase plasma volume acutely and maintain this regimen over a season. Instead of driving up hemoglobin, they are attempting to increase the speed (viscosity change) to deliver the same amount of red blood cells (and hemoglobin). Research on acute plasma volume expansion (APVE) shows some positive changes [1], but the theory isn’t showing real VO2 kinetic boosting. I have looked at 27 papers, and the study construction and subjects tested lead me to think we still don’t know why athletes improve from various endurance protocols.

Some recent cycling studies point to passive heat as an avenue, but the research is still early. A heat acclimatization study (2) on cycling showed no performance boost, but the question is, does additional heat change things versus replacing training in hot conditions? Sometimes the change doesn’t outweigh the compromised training.

The truth may be similar to altitude studies showing that some athletes don’t respond well, or at all. Some even get worse. Many heat-training advocates think some athletes improve oxygen transfer from plasma volume. That may happen, but if the workouts are not driving aerobic adaptations (hemoglobin mass), they’re likely creating a tradeoff and not an improvement.

I have found athletes with higher hematocrit levels respond to passive heat options if plasma volume increases and the workouts at regular temperatures are solid. Many athletes like being in a sauna. Sitting there for 30 minutes a few times a week is realistic and can in theory increase performance. Microcirculation studies from heat show no capillary density changes, so I believe the boosting is only for large athletes struggling to achieve core fitness.

Regeneration Protocol: Based on the cycling study with Buchheit (3), the temperature and duration aren’t extreme. Some caution is suggested, as the use of saunas is not for everyone. The solution is following the protocols of 2–3 sessions of sauna bathing and HRV monitoring and looking for positive trends as well as decreases in hematocrit. The effectiveness of this option is still unknown and it could be a glorified placebo. But the time trials I have seen share a performance benefit, so further investigation is suggested.

Compression and Travel

What is the impact of compression garments on travel fatigue? I wrote a review here, and I still don’t think much room exists for compression in sport besides comfort. The question is, how does one look at the entire continuum of compression options while traveling? The research isn’t there. But I believe that the longer the flight, the creation of fatigue becomes more than just crossing multiple time zones. Some believe that hydration issues exist, others focus on sitting for prolonged periods, and still others like myself believe swelling of the lower limbs may be reduced by a body garment. Some NBA teams have been rumored to use NormaTec while in flight, but this is speculation.

I have done biochemical and physiological testing before and after flights longer than 2 hours and yes, the body responds poorly. The intervention is largely what you do before and after the flight since not much can be done besides getting up and walking around. One option is looking at thermotherapy or pool sessions following evening arrivals, but the logistics are a big juggle. Light workouts simply are not going to happen with 3:00 AM arrivals, so most of the chances to mend the gap are few.

Regeneration Protocol: The best option when one lands is a combination of food, managing swelling, and priming the body for sleep. I prefer a combination of exercise and lymphatic kinetics to stimulate the appetite and move the body. Passive options are okay, and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) can be done on the plane. Thirty minutes of light aerobic pool activity in the pool does make a change (laser perimeter) and improves HRV and the testosterone:cortisol ratio. A normal meal at the appropriate time is helpful, but sleeping right after eating may create digestive issues.

EMS Practical Considerations

Why team sports don’t equip athletes with personal EMS units is a mystery to me. It’s the most efficient way to deal with injury patterns when training is limited. A great video can be found here. The amount of lymphatic pumping is weak compared to pool training, though if a limb is banged up some free proteins moving through the system are moving the chains. Research on lymphatic pumping is small, and teams should look at the soccer studies to take advantage of the complementary strength benefits.

Figure 5. Personal EMS units will evolve to include more sensors and connectivity to coaches.

The recovery of strength is not true recovery, but what we want with regeneration techniques is the facilitation of improved states of performance, not just a “sushi menu” of modalities to do à la carte. Collision sports like rugby and American football need EMS, due to the increased trauma the athletes experience. As the technology improves, expect the development of a way to capture sessions of EMS treatment variables and track athlete compliance via the Cloud.

Regeneration Protocol: The times when training is compromised are when EMS should be done. Be sure to schedule enough options for athletes to do EMS. It’s important to see when it should be done for athletes who find it weird or uncomfortable. Athletes, even compliant ones, may find EMS to be a burden, so it’s better to cycle it some of the time rather than have an athlete burnout and do it again later.

Low Carbohydrate and Hydration Phases

Some coaches are experimenting with low-carbohydrate training to deepen adaptations, and now believe that staying dehydrated during training will have the same effect. So far no research shows this to be a game changer, though if someone has something better than a “nothing placebo” I will change my mind. Theoretical changes to the body include better fuel utilization and mitochondrial biogenesis, but the best indicator is a body that moves faster and farther, not small sampled biological adaptations. Tradeoffs happen all the time, and some benefits become a loss when overall performance has changed. For example, many athletes lift to get stronger. But when muscle mass increases more than the power-to-weight ratio, it may not help.

Similar to training in the heat, training with lower hydration levels is a poor idea for two real-world reasons. First, even if the science is ahead of the curve, the legal acceptance of something going wrong is not. Second, blood plasma expansion is still unknown and may not be worth compromising training with athletes who already have nearly maximized their plasma volume. It’s better to have good workouts with less room for improvement than bad workouts with room to improve.

Regeneration Protocol: A wise approach is having the right fueling and hydration plan, not one that attempts to fool the body or hack it. I like removing artificial dietary practices during the offseason and early GPP to maximize internal adaptations and capacities, but not challenge recovery. Challenge the effort and output in training, not take away resources. No sleep research I know of shows benefits from not getting enough rest, and the point is that it’s better to leave things alone and focus on good training rather than hacking the body. Challenge the body by going harder and driving adaptations, not making things harder and having compromised workouts.

Please share so others may benefit.

References

[1] Berger N, Campbell I, Wilkerson I, Jones A. (2006) “Influence of acute plasma volume expansion on VO kinetics, VO2 peak, and performance during high-intensity cycle exercise.” J Appl Physiol 101: 707–714.

[2] Karlsen A, Racinais S, Jensen MV, Nørgaard SJ, Bonne T, Nybo L. (2015) “Heat acclimatization does not improve VO2 max or cycling performance in a cool climate in trained cyclists.” Scand J Med Sci Sports. 25 Suppl 1: 269–276.

[3] Stanley J, Halliday A, D’Auria S, Buchheit M, Leicht AS. (2015 ) “Effect of sauna-based heat acclimation on plasma volume and heart rate variability.” Eur J Appl Physiol. Apr;115(4): 785–794.

By Alejandro Muñoz López

Nowadays the development of sports science technology is much more rapid than the available knowledge and scientific publications around them. One reason may be the difficulty of using all the available technologies. There is so much information that even daily work generates a complex context.

One of the most developed and interesting areas of research is the use of accelerometers and — even more interesting — multisensor devices. Accelerometers have traditionally been used to track physical activity during different kinds of exercise, including quantifying non-active physical lifestyles for healthy subjects (Dyrstad, Hansen, Holme, & Anderssen, 2014) or professional sports (McLellan & Lovell, 2012). Typical multisensor devices used to track physical activities include GPS and accelerometers combined with heart rate monitors. However, most of these devices rate the sample at a maximum frequency of 100 Hz (Cummins, Orr, O’Connor, & West, 2013; Weaving, Marshall, Earle, Nevill, & Abt, 2014).

Accelerometers now incorporate frequencies up to 1000 Hz. They track very fast movements that occur in milliseconds, like contact time during a quick running step. These new frequencies open opportunities to understand different kinds of movement patterns and segmental movement accelerations, since accelerometers can provide acceleration in gravitational forces on three axes (forward-backwards, up-down, and tilt left-right).

One interesting multisensor device with these new characteristics is the WIMU (RealTrack Systems, Spain). This device was designed as a tool integrating many different kinds of information since it includes a 5 Hz GPS, 1000 Hz triaxial accelerometer, and 10,000 Hz triaxial gyroscope. Another practical aspect is that this device can connect to other gadgets via Bluetooth, Wifi, or ANT+. Thus, it is possible to combine the WIMU with heart rate monitors (Garmin HRM run band) or the super-interesting MOXY, which allows oxygen saturation testing via infrared sensors. Combining all these sensors during the same activity provides a wide range of information that may help in understanding the reality from different points of view.

In Keep-fit.es, a Spanish training and sports sciences network, we use the WIMU as our reference for tracking physical activity and training loads and testing the fitness/stress status of our clients. We use it daily to gauge their progress. A good point of the WIMU is that you can fit it on many different places to test different aspects of movement and training.

The Software: Powerful and Advanced

One of my first considerations before buying any technology is the ability to analyze the raw data. Most devices and software include the option to export raw data to Excel or CSV, but then you need third-party software. However, WIMU software (QÜIKO) allows the user to analyze the raw data on the device itself, using powerful applications called monitors that facilitate the analysis and even combine different sensors. As with any advanced software, you’re likely to struggle in the beginning. You also may need advanced knowledge of raw data analysis to understand a number of curves the software can generate. After a few weeks working with the software, though, you are likely to become more experienced and more comfortable with it.

Figure 1. QÜIKO options. Between its multiple technical options, the software allows users to choose a data reduction when using high frequencies. WIMU will record from 10 to 1000 Hz, and the software can reduce the data so the file size will be smaller.

One option I especially like is the ability to combine any video format on the analysis, which helps you understand what each peak of the curve from each sensor means. The QÜIKO also incorporates a few nice visual graphics combining sensors like the gyroscope and the accelerometers, allowing the option to track this information in real time via a WiFi connection. This will help you, for example, with the encoder mode.

Figure 2. QÜIKO dashboard. The movement is a hamstring kick with a VersaPulley. The Y-axis gyroscope, in degrees, is in blue. In yellow, vertical speed as calculated by the encoder monitor. With the video, we can appreciate how the highest speed is achieved when the leg is closest to the ground.

Team Sports Uses

As fitness coach of the Latvian Football Association team, I use the WIMU every day for a variety of different purposes: to test each player’s individual fitness, check recovery status, and ensure that daily training suits the load we expect. The Garmin HRM band provided with the WIMU opens the option to use the heart rate variability analysis. Immediately after waking up every morning, players sit in a quiet, slightly dark room at a comfortable temperature for 10 minutes with their heart rate bands. This information is downloaded from the WIMU to the QÜIKO and analyzed (Figure 3). QÜIKO heart rate variability analysis includes time domain and non-linear variables, as they have been shown to be the most validated during short-time analysis (Buchheit, 2014).

Figure 3. HRV analysis for multiple WIMU devices. The heart rate monitor allows simultaneous analysis of any number of devices, and it includes time dominion and non-linear analysis variables. It also includes a medium-power filter for autopic beats, with a high concurrence with the Kubios software (unpublished data).

During training, I use a GPS + accelerometer + heart rate device to track each player’s load. The football monitor combines the latest advances and most commonly scientific proved variables, giving a huge amount of information. In most cases, you will need to select what is most relevant for you and your sport within the summary option (Table 1). Usually, most of the monitors have the option to export this analysis to Excel, including averages and standard deviations.

Table 1. An example of a soccer training summary with GPS and accelerometer variables.

The Encoder Option

An accelerometer of 1000 Hz opens the door to many different kinds of analysis, including using the WIMU as a linear or rotational encoder. An encoder is a tool used to control the speed of a particular movement. When the movement is linear, you may use a linear encoder. With rotating movements, you may use a rotational one. Usually, linear encoders include a cable that is extended during the movement, assessing the speed of this extension. Rotational encoders use a wheel rotating around a light cell to assess the speed.

WIMU can be used with both types, but the information you get might be different. Using the accelerometer as a linear encoder lets you easily convert this acceleration to speed—in fact, the encoder monitor does this its own. This monitor also provides important information such as displacement, concentric and eccentric maximum, average speed, and mean propulsive speed (Gonzalez-Badillo, Marques, & Sanchez-Medina, 2011) or RFD (Oliveira, Corvino, Caputo, Aagaard, & Denadai, 2015) (Figure 4).

As a rotational encoder, you can use the appropriate channel from the gyroscope to provide the information in angular velocity (degrees per second). The encoder monitor also gives the chance to export the analysis to Excel, and for advanced analysis it could be interesting to export the raw data to various formats such as CSV, Excel, text, and so forth.

The software also includes the option to set a target speed range. This feature is useful if you are interested in stopping your clients’ repetitions after a percentage of speed decrease. Using speed to control resistance training has been shown to be more effective and secure than other methods such as % RM (Gonzalez-Badillo et al., 2011).

Figure 4. Encoder monitor during a deep squat test. The graph represents the estimated vertical speed (m/s) derived from the accelerometer at 1000 Hz.

It is also interesting to use the accelerometer by placing the WIMU on different parts of the body, not just on a bar. For example, we place it on the forearm close to the wrist during some of our training with tennis players, or inside the harness between scapulas during chin-up endurance testing (Figure 5). With this kind of analysis, we can track the power of a drive and how it varies during a game or training session.

Figure 5. WIMU used to test chin-up endurance. On the graph, you can easily appreciate how the athlete is able to make constant curves and peaks on the first repetitions and while the test is progressing this curves are longer, more irregular and with fewer speed peaks (which means more fatigue)

Using the Gyroscope for Movement Analysis

I have dramatically changed my clients’ analysis since discovering the gyroscope. In the past, I based resistance training on muscle training. Nowadays, I prefer to train movements. Previously we didn’t have the technology to test movements with objective data during dynamic actions. Thus, we used angle analysis with manual or video tools, but the analysis was either on static positions or in not real time. With the WIMU, it is now possible to test any angle on any dynamic or static movement/action. These ranges from a simple hamstring range of motion test in a supine position to an advanced hip movement pattern while walking.

Since I started working as a football fitness coach, I realized that the hips are at the center of most injury problems. These problems are not limited to football players. They remain possibilities for anyone, especially the sedentary or elderly. As a result, we created a battery of tests using the WIMU to control the range of motion of important joints. These tests include hip flexion in a supine position with both extended and flexed knee from 90o, internal and external hip rotation in a prone position, ankle dorsiflexion with the knee touching the wall, maximum hip extension in a prone position, and leg abduction in a supine position. It is interesting to see how many imbalances are revealed in just 10 minutes with these simple tests (Table 2 and Figure 6).

Table 2. Results from a range of motion and pelvic position test using the WIMU

Figure 6. Hip flexion test. The WIMU is placed on the frontal tibia lower position. The left circle shows the degrees on the three spatial axes. The Z axis, in this case, shows 76 degrees of flexion.

We have also developed an easy tool to adapt the WIMU to hip position use. I have been obsessed with hip-position testing since many problems related to the lower limbs, walking, falling, or low-back pain come from this area. Placing the WIMU on the designed pocket, we can analyze each axis of the gyroscope to get information from the tilt anterior or posterior position (Z axis), hip dissymmetry (Y axis) and transverse rotations (X axis) (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Inclinometer constructed to test hip position with the WIMU. Lateral pins are placed on both iliac crests and the WIMU is situated at the back.

Combining Different Sensors for Gait Analysis

When clients come to us at Keep-Fit.es to improve their running or to lose weight, we ask: are their walking/running movements patterns correct? (see example in Figure 8). Our basic objective is giving our clients adherence to sport and training, in general, and injuries may impede this ability. We combine the power of the accelerometer and the gyroscope. With the raw data, it is possible to analyze anything from any sensor on any movement, especially when it is linked to the video. However, some interesting monitors on the QÜIKO—such as the steps monitor—automatically give information related to each stride. More important, it creates a split from each one for further raw data analysis.

Figure 8. In this case, the woman was diagnosed with left piriformis syndrome. While she was walking, we could see on the 3D viewer how the WIMU is moved on the upper part to the right when she steps with her left foot. This occurs because the left hip moves excessively to the left, exactly 5.5 degrees, with 10.2 degrees of rotation to the right.

To do running/walking analysis, we place the WIMU on the sacroiliac joint in a vertical position, fixed with a belt around the hips. We take an interval of about 30 seconds and analyze it. Table 3 shows some practical information captured with this test. We can see how the athlete has almost the same maximum and average impact stepping with both legs. However, in analyzing the gyroscope, we found that when stepping with the left foot, the hip moves laterally to the left since the WIMU is moving 4.2 degrees to the right. This imbalance may result in an injury, especially if these degrees increase. A possible reason may be a weaker gluteus medial on the left side.

Table 3. Running analysis.

Conclusions

Actual technologies lead the sports performance analysis market, and this will be even more apparent in the future. Despite all these exciting and awesome opportunities, sports scientists and coaches will select the most useful tools for their purposes, and of course, the ones that best suit individual budgets. To have so many good sensors on the same tool, such as the WIMU, will help you save money despite the necessary learning curve.

However, this device is not a substitute for other tools: speed cells are still probably the best option for racing times, smaller accelerometers could be placed on other interesting parts and would have longer battery life, and more user-friendly software could help with profiles that just need some quick analysis. WIMU is yet another option and definitely will help you improve both your clients’ performance and—what is for me even more important—your own practical knowledge.

Please share so others may benefit.

References

1. Buchheit, M. (2014). Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome? Front Physiol, 5, 73. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2014.00073
2. Cummins, C., Orr, R., O’Connor, H., & West, C. (2013). Global positioning systems (GPS) and microtechnology sensors in team sports: a systematic review. Sports Med, 43(10), 1025-1042. doi: 10.1007/s40279-013-0069-2
3. Dyrstad, S. M., Hansen, B. H., Holme, I. M., & Anderssen, S. A. (2014). Comparison of self-reported versus accelerometer-measured physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 46(1), 99-106. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a0595f
4. Gonzalez-Badillo, J. J., Marques, M. C., & Sanchez-Medina, L. (2011). The importance of movement velocity as a measure to control resistance training intensity. J Hum Kinet, 29a, 15-19. doi: 10.2478/v10078-011-0053-6
5. McLellan, C. P., & Lovell, D. I. (2012). Neuromuscular responses to impact and collision during elite rugby league match play. J Strength Cond Res, 26(5), 1431-1440. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318231a627
6. Oliveira, A. S., Corvino, R. B., Caputo, F., Aagaard, P., & Denadai, B. S. (2015). Effects of fast-velocity eccentric resistance training on early and late rate of force development. Eur J Sport Sci, 1-7. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2015.1010593
7. Weaving, D., Marshall, P., Earle, K., Nevill, A., & Abt, G. (2014). Combining internal- and external-training-load measures in professional rugby league. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 9(6), 905-912. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2013-0444