By Eli Mizelman

Introduction

Bovine colostrum (BC) is the first milk secreted by cows after calving. Colostrum is high in protein and contains several bioactive substances including growth and antimicrobial factors (Donavan and Odle 1994; Reiter 1978). The main growth factor in BC is Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) (Francis et al. 1988) which stimulates the growth of muscle tissue (Tomas 1991) and is important in maintaining muscle mass and function in adults (Borst 2001). Antimicrobial factors in bovine colostrum include immunoglobulin A (Mach and Pahud 1971) and a variety of other less specific antimicrobial proteins and peptides like lysozyme and lactoferrin (Korhonen 1977; Shing 2009) that are important for immune system function.

Previous studies have shown improvements in body composition (Antonio 2001), power (Buckley 2003; Hofman 2002) and strength (Duff 2014) when BC supplementation was taken during a resistance training program. The mechanism through which BC acts to benefit performance remains unclear.

The first study to investigate the effect of BC supplementation on exercise performance was Mero et al. in 1997. Since then, research has investigated the ability of BC supplementation to improve endurance, and anaerobic performance, and increase lean tissue mass, power, and strength. In addition, researchers are also trying to determine mechanisms for these improvements.

Body Composition and Strength

The first study to examine whether BC supplementation affects body composition and strength was published in 2001 (Antonio et al 2001). In the study, twenty-two trained males and females, were randomly assigned to either a BC (20 g/day) or a whey protein group prior to participating in an 8-week resistance and aerobic program that involved three training sessions per each week.

Body composition was analyzed before and on completion of the study using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Body mass significantly increased for the whey group, but primarily due to an increase in fat mass, while the BC group showed significant increase in lean body mass only, without any significant change in body weight. Strength was assessed at the same time points using 1RM strength tests. There was no significant difference between groups in strength.

However, another study (Kerksick 2001) found that upper body strength significantly increased after 12 weeks of resistant training and BC supplementation (60 g/day) in comparison to the same resistance training and placebo. Forty-nine trained males and females participated in the study and strength was determined by 1RM bench press and leg press. There was no significant difference for the leg press 1RM. In contrast to this finding, supplementation with the same dose (60 g/day) of BC, during eight weeks of strength and plyometric training, in fifty-one physically active males, was not associated with significant changes in strength (Buckley 2003).

In 2004, the effect of BC supplementation on changes in body composition was examined (Brinkworth 2004), using the same dose (60 g/day). In this study, active males trained the elbow flexors of their non-dominant arm four times a week. 1RM bicep curl, MRI and maximal voluntary isometric contraction of the upper arm were measured at baseline and after 4 and 8 weeks of supplementation. When compared with both their untrained arm and with the placebo group, upper limb circumference and total cross-sectional area were significantly increased in the trained arm of BC subjects. However, there were no significant differences between groups for upper limb muscle cross-sectional area.

Brinkworth et al. attributed the increase in the cross-sectional area following BC supplementation to an increase in skin cross-sectional area, based on a study that found that canine skin cells proliferate with increasing concentrations of BC (Torre 2006).

Duff et al. (2014) assessed forty older adults randomly assigned to 60g/day of BC or whey protein while participating in a three day/week resistance training program for eight weeks. Strength was assessed using 1RM bench press and leg press and body composition by DXA. BC supplemented participants increased their leg strength to a greater extent than whey protein supplemented participants. Bench press strength, on the other hand, as well as lean tissue mass, were not significantly different between groups.

Power

One of the first studies to investigate the effect of BC supplementation on power was conducted in a double-blind manner and a crossover design (Leppäluoto 2000). Ten athletes performed two jump tests on days 11 and 12 of the supplementation. After the overall analysis, it was found that BC supplementation significantly improved jump flight times in comparison to placebo supplementation. However, limited conclusions can be drawn from this study as neither the dose administered nor details of training and diet control was reported by the authors. The investigation is yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

In another double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study seventeen female and eighteen male elite field hockey players received either 60 g/day of BC or whey protein for eight weeks (Hofman 2002). Vertical jump performance improved more in the BC group, but the differences were not statistically significant.

Buckley (2003) assessed 51 males who completed eight weeks of resistance and plyometric training while consuming 60 g/day of BC (n= 26) or whey (n =25). BC supplementation significantly improved peak cycle power and vertical jump height, suggesting that BC was beneficial to power activities.

Anaerobic Performance

Anaerobic glycolysis results in the production of H+ and lactate. Buffer capacity is the ability to bind free protons (i.e. to buffer H+), and offset reductions in pH during exercise; hence, given the strong association between acidosis and muscular fatigue, buffer capacity is an important attribute for maintaining anaerobic performance (Parkhouse 1984).

The main buffers of H+ come from skeletal muscle and include protein, inorganic phosphate, and phosphocreatine. Other components in blood including hemoglobin, bicarbonate, and plasma proteins also buffer H+. One study (Brinkworth 2002) examined whether BC supplementation could enhance the buffering of H+, in response to a 9-week training program with 13 elite female rowers who consumed 60 g/day of BC or whey. Two rowing tests were used to assess performance before and on completion of the supplementation period. Buffering capacity was estimated from the differences in the blood lactate levels and the blood pH levels that were taken at the end of each workload during the tests. It was found that buffering capacity was significantly increased after BC supplementation vs. placebo.

Brinkworth (2004) determined the component of blood buffering capacity that was enhanced following BC supplementation. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin levels, plasma bicarbonate levels or plasma buffering capacity in general between BC and placebo groups. The authors concluded that the observed increase in buffering capacity from their previous work (Brinkworth 2002) was the result of enhanced muscle buffering capacity, but they were unable to determine this because no muscle biopsy samples were collected.

Studies are mixed regarding the effect of BC on anaerobic performance. Hofman (2002) examined the effect of 8 weeks of BC supplementation (60 g/day) on sprint performance in 18 elite male and 17 female hockey players. Repeated sprint running performance (5 × 10 m) significantly improved in the BC supplemented group compared with the placebo group; however, only performance measures were reported in this study, so the mechanism behind the improvement in sprint performance is unclear. In contrast, Shing (2006) found no improvement in a time-to-fatigue test at 110% of ventilatory threshold, between BC and placebo in 29 highly trained male road cyclists. The dosage used in the study was only 10 g/day (for eight weeks); therefore, dosage may have been insufficient. Buckley (2003) used a higher dose of supplementation of 60 g/day of BC vs. whey for eight weeks on 51 males; however they also found that anaerobic work capacity was not different between the groups.

Bovine Colostrum supplementation significantly improved peak cycle power and vertical jump height.
Click To Tweet

Endurance

Shing (2009) studied 39 male subjects, supplemented with BC (60 g/day) or whey for eight weeks during an aerobic training program that included three 45-minute running sessions per week. The subjects performed two incremental treadmill tests, at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks of supplementation. No significant changes in running performance were observed after four weeks, but, after eight weeks, subjects in the BC group covered a significantly greater distance and completed more work in the second treadmill test than the whey group. The mechanism for the significant improvement in running performance is unknown and also could not be explained by alterations in respiratory exchange ratio, lactate threshold or IGF-1 levels (Shing 2009).

Another study (Shing 2006) that used a dose of 10 g/day found that BC supplementation (in comparison to whey) improved 40 km time-trial performance at the end of a 5-day high-intensity training period but not during normal training. Although increased muscle glycogen levels during normal training do not improve endurance performance (Hawley 1997), during repeated days of high-intensity exercise, increased muscle glycogen levels may prevent and delay fatigue (Kavouras 2004; McInerney 2005). Due to these findings and the fact that colostrum feeding in calves is associated with enhanced activity of the rate-limiting enzymes for gluconeogenesis – pyruvate carboxylase and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (Hammon 2003), BC supplementation may improve muscle glycogen resynthesis during periods of intense training.

Coombes (2002) assessed whether there was a dose response of BC on endurance performance. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 42 cyclists completed a work-based cycle time-trial (2.8 kJ/kg), following a 2-hour endurance ride, both before and after eight weeks of supplementation of 20 or 60 g/day of BC, or whey. Time-trial performance significantly improved in cyclists who were supplemented with BC (both dosages) when compared with the whey. The similar improvements in performance in both of the BC groups suggest that there may be a limit beyond which a higher BC dose does not provide any added performance benefit. The authors hypothesized that the improvement in the endurance was the result of enhanced nutrient uptake from the intestine, mediated by other growth factors found in colostrum. Nevertheless, the effects of BC supplementation on intestinal changes has not been directly measured yet.

Shing (2013) assessed ten highly-trained male road cyclists randomly assigned to a 10 g/day supplementation of BC or whey, for eight weeks that ended in a five-day cycle race. BC supplementation significantly prevented a decrease in testosterone concentration over the race. In addition, parasympathetic indices of heart rate variability (i.e., increased RR intervals) were elevated in the BC group and reduced in the whey group, indicating better cardiovascular functioning with lower heart rate and higher cardiac output in the BC group.

Immune Function

Intense exercise suppresses immunity for several hours (Nieman 2000). Hence, athletes that perform high-intensity training are at a high risk for over-training syndrome (Halson 2002; Halson 2003; Mackinnon 2000) and upper respiratory tract infections (Mackinnon 2000; Fitzgerald 1991). Overtraining syndrome is a neuroendocrine disorder characterized by poor performance in competition, inability to maintain training loads, persistent fatigue, reduced catecholamine excretion, frequent illness, disturbed sleep and alterations in mood state. It is estimated that, at any given time, between 7 and 20% of all athletes may exhibit symptoms of overtraining syndrome. It is believed that excessively large volumes of training without adequate rest and recovery leads to overtraining syndrome (Mackinnon 2000).

The first study to examine the effect of BC supplementation on immune function (Mero 1997) reported that eight days of supplementation with a BC during normal training did not increase salivary IgA concentration. However, another study by the same authors (Mero 2002) showed that athletes ingesting BC for two weeks at a dose of 20 g/day experienced a 33% increase in salivary IgA concentrations. Note that in the second study, the duration of the supplementation was longer and the authors used BC powder that contains more immune factors than the liquid BC used in the first study.

In a study on marathon runners (Crooks 2006), a significant increase in salivary IgA levels was found after 12 weeks of 26 g/day BC supplementation in comparison to placebo; however, this was not associated with a difference in upper respiratory tract infections. On the other hand, two other studies (Shing 2007; Shing 2013) on male cyclists, with 10 g/day supplementation of BC for eight weeks, found no change in salivary IgA levels, natural killer cell cytotoxicity, lymphocyte or neutrophil surface markers. These results might be due to the lower dosage used in this study (10g/ day vs. 20-26g/ day).

Brinkworth (2003) investigated the relationship between BC supplementation and upper respiratory tract infections incidence based on several studies involving resistance training or endurance training interventions in which subjects ingested BC at 60g/ day vs. placebo, over an eight-week period. It was found that the percentage of participants that had upper respiratory tract infections was greater in the placebo group.

IGF-1

Note: “Colostrum is not prohibited by WADA, however, due to the fact that it contains certain quantities of IGF-1 and other growth factors which are prohibited, WADA does not recommend the ingestion of BC.” See WADA Prohibited List.

Despite the fact that BC contains IGF-1, only one group of authors reported significant increases in IGF-1 levels after BC supplementation for 8 and 14 days (Mero 1997; Mero 2002). IGF-1 is usually degraded in the gastrointestinal tract, but it was suggested that some factors in BC may improve the absorption of IGF-1 by preventing its breakdown (Playford 1993).

Normal IGF-1 levels for young adults are 14-48 nmol/L. The increase reported in the studies mentioned above, was approximately 5 nmol/L, while the amount of IGF-1 contained in the BC was 74 μg/day. At this dose, if 65% of IGF-1 was absorbed, the concentration of IGF-1 would only be expected to rise only by approximately 1.05 nmol/L. This suggests that the increase in serum IGF-1 was probably due to an increase in endogenous production (Shing 2009). Other studies with similar doses of BC and longer supplementation periods have reported no significant changes in IGF-1 levels following 4–8 weeks of BC supplementation (Buckley 2003; Coombes 2002).

My Last Study

Last year, (study is yet to be published) we conducted a study that examined the effect of eight weeks of bovine colostrum supplementation in comparison to soy protein, on rugby players’: strength, power, anaerobic fitness, aerobic fitness, body composition, and IgA, IL-6, IL-1β and CRP levels, during the rugby season. In a double-blind manner and 1:1 allocation ratio, 29 players received 38g/day of protein from BC protein powder or soy protein. Both supplements were flavorless and had the same color, smell, and texture. We also controlled for energy intake and training regime for each athlete.

We found a significant difference in improving power (vertical jump) with the colostrum group increasing more than the soy group. We have also found a significant difference in improving aerobic fitness with the colostrum group increasing predicted aerobic capacity more than the soy group.

The author’s thematic poster from the 2015 ACSM Annual Meeting. The full-resolution poster can be viewed here.

Summary

Due to the small number of studies that have been conducted, we are far from having conclusive evidence for the improvement of performance by BC supplementation. Nevertheless, one can conclude from the mentioned studies that there is a great potential for BC to have a positive effect on athlete performance, especially when it comes to power, strength, and aerobic fitness.

Sport nutritionists should conduct more research on this matter so that 1) we will have sufficient statistical evidence to conclude whether BC does help improve performance, and 2) we would be able to hypothesis the mechanism in which BC acts in favor of improving athlete performance.

Please share so others may benefit.

References

1. Antonio J, Sanders MS, Van Gammeren D. (2001). The effects of bovine colostrum supplementation on body composition and exercise performance in active men and women. Nutrition; 17: 243-7.
2. Brinkworth GD, Buckley JD, Bourdon PC, et al. (2002). Oral bovine colostrum supplementation enhances buffer capacity but not rowing performance in elite female rowers. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab; 12: 349–65
3. Brinkworth GD, Buckley JD. (2003). Concentrated bovine colostrum protein supplementation reduces the incidence of self-reported symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection in adult males. Eur J Nutr; 42: 228-32.
4. Brinkworth GD, Buckley JD. (2004). Bovine colostrum supplementation does not affect plasma buffer capacity or hemoglobin content in elite female rowers. Eur J Appl Physiol; 91: 353–6
5. Buckley JD, Abbott MJ, Brinkworth GD, et al. (2002). Bovine colostrum supplementation during endurance running training improves recovery, but not performance. J Sci Med Sport; 5: 65-79
6. Buckley JD, Brinkworth GD, Abbott MJ. (2003). Effect of bovine colostrum on anaerobic exercise performance and plasma insulin-like growth factor I. J Sports Sci; 21: 577-88.
7. Coombes JS, Conacher M, Austen SK, et al. (2002). Dose effects of oral bovine colostrum on physical work capacity in cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc; 34: 1184-8.
8. Craig Twist and Jamie Highton. (2013). Monitoring fatigue and recovery in rugby league players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 8, 467-474.
9. Crooks C, Wall C, Cross M, et al. (2006). The effect of bovine colostrum supplementation on salivary IgA in distance runners. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab; 16: 47-64.
10. Duff W, Chilibeck PD, Rooke JJ, Kaviami M, Krentz JR, Haines DM. (2014). The effect of bovine colostrum supplementation in older adults during resistance training. IJSNEM; 24: 276 -285
11. Fitzgerald L. (1991). Overtraining increases the susceptibility to infection. Int J Sports Med; 12 Suppl. 1: S5-8.
12. Fry RW, Morton AR, Crawford GPM, Keast D. (1992). Cell numbers and in vitro responses of leukocytes and lymphocyte subpopulations following maximal exercise and interval training sessions of different intensities. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 64:218–27.
13. Gabbett TJ. (2007). Science of rugby league football: A review. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23:9, 961-976.
14. Gleeson M. (2005). Assessing immune function changes in exercise and diet intervention studies. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care; 8: 511-5.
15. Halson SL, Bridge MW, Meeusen R, et al. (2002). Time course of performance changes and fatigue markers during intensified training in trained cyclists. J Appl Physiol; 93: 947-56.
16. Halson SL, Lancaster GI, Jeukendrup AE, et al. (2003) .Immunological responses to overreaching in cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc; 35: 854-61.
17. Hammon HM, Sauter SN, Reist M, et al. (2003).Dexamethasone and colostrum feeding affect hepatic gluconeogenic enzymes differently in neonatal calves. J Anim Sci; 81: 3095-106.
18. Hawley JA, Palmer GS, Noakes TD. (1997). Effects of 3 days of carbohydrate supplementation on muscle glycogen content and utilization during a 1-h cycling performance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol; 75: 407-12.
19. Hofman Z, Smeets R, Verlaan G, et al. (2002). The effect of bovine colostrum supplementation on exercise performance in elite field hockey players. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab; 12: 461-9.
20. Kavouras SA, Troup JP, Berning JR. (2004). The influence of low versus high carbohydrate diet on a 45-min strenuous cycling exercise. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab; 14: 62-72.
21. Kerksick C, Kreider R, Rasmussen C, et al. (2001). Effects of bovine colostrum supplementation on training adaptations II: performance [abstract]. FASEB J; 15: LB315
22. Leppäluoto J, Rasi S, Martikkala V, et al. (2000). Bovine colostrum supplementation enhances physical performance on maximal exercise tests. 2000 Pre-Olympic Congress Sports Medicine and Physical Education International Congress on Sport Science; 2000 Sep 7–13: Brisbane (QLD).
23. Mackinnon LT. (2000). Overtraining effects on immunity and performance in athletes. Immunology and Cell Biology; 78, 502–509.
24. McInerney P, Lessard SJ, Burke LM, et al. (2005). Failure to repeatedly supercompensate muscle glycogen stores in highly trained men. Med Sci Sports Exerc; 37: 404-11.
25. Mero A, Kahkonen J, Nykanen T, et al. (2002). IGF-I, IgA, and IgG responses to bovine colostrum supplementation during training. J Appl Physiol; 93: 732-9.
26. Mero A, Miikkulainen H, Riski J, et al. (1997). Effects of bovine colostrum supplementation on serum IGF-I, IgG, hormone, and saliva IgA during training. J Appl Physiol; 83: 1144–51
27. Mero A, Nykänen T, Rasi S, et al. (2002). IGF-1, IGFBP-3, growth hormone and testosterone in male and female athletes during bovine colostrum supplementation. Med Sci Sports Exerc; 35: s299
28. Nieman DC. (2002). Is infection risk linked to exercise workload? Med Sci Sports Exerc; 32: S406-11.
29. Parkhouse, W.S., and D.C. McKenzie. (1984). Possible contribution of skeletal muscle buffers to enhanced anaerobic performance: a brief review. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 16:328-338.
30. Playford RJ, Woodman AC, Clark P, et al. (1993). Effect of luminal growth factor preservation on intestinal growth. Lancet; 341: 843–8
31. Rhind SG, Shek PN, Shinkai S, Shephard RJ. (1994). Differential expression of interleukin-2 receptor alpha and beta chains in relation to natural killer cell subsets and aerobic fitness. Int. J.Sports Med.15: 911–18.
32. Shing CM, Hunter DC, Stevenson LM. (2009). Bovine colostrum supplementation and exercise performance: potential mechanisms. Sports Med; 39: 1033–1054.
33. Shing CM, Jenkins DG, Stevenson L, et al. (2006). The influence of bovine colostrum supplementation on exercise performance in highly-trained cyclists. Br J Sports Med; 40: 797-801.
34. Shing CM, Peake J, Suzuki K, et al. (2007) Effects of bovine colostrum supplementation on immune variables in highly trained cyclists. J Appl Physiol; 102: 1113-22.
35. Shing CM, Peake JM, Suzuki K, Jenkins DG, Coombes JS. (2013). A pilot study: bovine colostrum supplementation and hormonal and autonomic responses to competitive cycling. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness; 53(5): 490-501.
36. Smith LL. (2004). Tissue trauma: the underlying cause of overtraining syndrome? J Strength Cond Res. 18(1):185-93.
37. Torre C, Jeusette I, Serra M, et al. (2006). Bovine colostrum increases proliferation of canine skin fibroblasts. J Nutr; 136: 2058–60
38. Urhausen A, Gabriel H, Kindermann W. (1995). Blood hormones as markers of training stress and overtraining. Sports Med. 20: 251–76.
39. O’Gorman D, Hunter A, McDonnacha C. (2000). Validity of field tests for evaluating endurance capacity in competitive and international-level sports participants. J Strength Cond Res. 14 (1): 62-7.
40. Duthie G, Pyne D, Hooper S. (2003). Applied physiology and game analysis of rugby union. Sports Med. 33 (13): 973-991.
41. Woof JM, Ken MA. (2006). The function of immunoglobulin A in immunity. J Pathol. 208: 270–282.
42. Ingle PV, Patel DM. (2011). C- Reactive protein in various disease condition- an overview. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 4(1): 9-13.
43. Pedersen BK, Steensberg A, Fischer C, Keller C, Keller P, Plomgaard P, Wolsk-Petersen E, Febbraio M. (2004). The metabolic role of IL-6 produced during exercise: is IL-6 an exercise factor? Proc Nutr Soc. 63, 263–267.
44. Ostrowski K, Rohde T, Asp S, Schjerling P, Klarlund Pederse B. (1999). Pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokine balance in strenuous exercise in humans. J Physiol. 515.1, 287—291.

By Nick Garcia

In the next few weeks, it is my goal to do a multiple part article on the setup and application of Dr. Bondarchuk’s system as it was taught to me and how I understand it.

First off it is extremely important to me that I give credit to the people who have guided me in the right direction with this system. Derek Evely and Martin Bingisser. Martin runs a site called HMMR Media which has a plethora of information on this system and various other topics from a group of experienced coaches. Martin and I also do a weekly podcast on numerous training ideas, theories, and often include a guest.

It Starts With Exercises

To get started with Dr. B’s system, you must first understand how each of the exercises is classified. The whole system is built upon exercises, and, therefore, it is crucial to know what category each one belongs. There are four exercise classifications: CE = Competitive Exercise, SDE = Specific Development Exercise, SPE = Specific Preparatory Exercise, and GPE = General Preparatory Exercise.

CE or Competitive exercise is doing the competitive movement whether it is with the competition implement or various other light and heavy implements.

SDE or Specific Development Exercise is a movement that closely resembles the competitive movement but is done with something other than the traditional implements. For example, you could do a stand throw with a 50lb sandbag or med ball.

SPE or Specific Preparatory Exercises are movements that use the same prime muscles as the competitive exercises but does not necessarily mimic the motion. For a thrower, this might be an Olympic Lift or lower body movement such as a step up or squat.

GPE or General Preparatory Exercises are exercises that are completely different than the CE’s and can even use different energy systems if performed in a circuit fashion in which I like to do it. I structure my GPE’s in this manner to keep balance throughout the body. 1 Transverse plane core movement or Twist, 1 Frontal plane core movement, one back exercise, and one sagittal plane core movement. Within these core movements, I try to include movements that may aid in other areas. For example, when doing my frontal plane movement one exercise I will perform is the KB Windmill. Not only does that work the core but it also works shoulder stability and flexibility. And by doing all the exercises together there is also a cardio element to the circuit. Being creative here is a key.

Putting Together a Training Cycle

Exercises are the individual elements of the system, but they have to be put together into a training cycle. Each training cycle throughout the year falls into 1 of 3 categories depending on what role it needs to play.

The first cycle to discuss is the Developmental Cycle. This is where most if not all the development takes place. Obviously that is why it has the name it has. The objective of this cycle is to hit what is called PEAK Form. Once PEAK form is reached you have a number of sessions before you begin to decline in performance. PEAK form is always dependent upon the athlete. For example, my PEAK form is between 16-22 sessions. After 22 sessions my performance declines. Like I said all athletes are different. My younger athletes tend to hit PEAK form between 23-28 sessions. To pinpoint this, data will have to be taken each session. How to do this and determine PEAK form will be discussed at a later time. The Development Cycle includes each of the following discussed above: CE, 1 SDE, 2 SPE’s, and 4 GPE’s. Following the developmental cycle, you have two choices. Move to rest/cleanse cycle or move to Maintenance. Let’s discuss moving to the Maintenance Cycle first.

PEAK form is always dependent upon the athlete. - Nick Garcia on the Bondarchuk System
Click To Tweet

After the developmental cycle would move to the Maintenance Cycle when there is not enough time to fit in a rest/cleanse cycle and another Developmental Cycle. The goal of this cycle is to maintain a high level of performance for a long period of time. For example, when the end of the season comes near in the college setting you have a number of meets you have to perform your best. That normally starts with the conference meet followed by regionals, NCAA finals, and USA’s. It is a real challenge to be at your best for all of these meets, so the Maintenance Cycle is meant to hold a high level of performance to get you through each meet at or close to PEAK form. Setting up the Maintenance cycle is the same as setting up the Developmental Cycle. The exercises are just switched every 14 days no matter what. You can run many Maintenance Cycles back to back to back without a problem.

Finally, let’s have a look at the Cleanse/Rest Cycle. The objective of the Cleanse/Rest Cycle is to help you recover from the previous Developmental or Maintenance cycle and to Cleanse your body of all the previous exercises that your body had adapted too. The length of this also depends on the athlete. Too few sessions can ruin the reaction in the next Developmental Cycle. I always like to do 20 sessions using this method to make sure my body is completely cleansed of the previous cycle. The basic set up of this cycle is to throw 4-5 reps with a lighter then normal implement and perform 5 Bodyweight, Kettle Bell, or Med Ball Exercises after the throws. I sequence these exercise like so: an explosive, lower body, back, twist, and abdominal. An example would be: KB throw for height x6, BW Squat x10, Plate Good Morning x6, Plate Overhead Twist x10e, V-Ups x10. You would repeat the sequence of 4-5 throws and five exercises four times total for a total of 16-20 throws and four circuits. After 20 sessions, we would begin a new Developmental Cycle.

Up Next

Next article will focus on exercise selection for developmental and maintenance cycles and how to apply and use the data you collect each training session.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

In 1993, I began incorporating eccentrics into my training. But I didn’t really use the method well until I started coaching years later. Since most exercise science textbooks and bodybuilding magazines inform and expose students and trainees relatively early in their development, we assume we know the truths of eccentric training. I have also made some changes to my training and rehabilitation programs because I have moved away from researching science to making science now that I have better biochemistry data and instruments to observe transfer.

In this article, I will review some myths that science is changing as a result of better research. Anyone—from the personal trainer working with geriatrics to elite performance coaches—can benefit by learning more about the evolution of eccentric training.

My biggest annoyance is starting from ground zero because most readers want to skip to workouts, exercises, or protocols. But we need to start with a working definition of eccentric training specific to coaches and sports medicine professional.

“Eccentric action is simply muscle lengthening from loading during negative work.”

I developed this definition after reading research studies and online resources. When I read my exercise or sport science texts, I saw a pattern that favored resistance training but wanted to get away from the weight room to general body loading. Nearly every example of eccentrics was the cliche “dumbbells during bicep curls,” so I wanted a broader spectrum.

We tend to think of eccentrics as a part of a repetition in lifting because of the popularity of tempo numbers from strength and conditioning coaches who popularized Time under Tension (TUT). But we need to look at all movements more closely, not stay compartmentalized in the weight room. On the other hand, the irony of velocity-based training is that most data focuses on concentric metrics, such as peak power and mean velocity.

Finally, I wanted to include more injury reduction strategies and return to play concepts because the gray exchange area between discharging from therapists to strength coach intake is usually botched. Eccentric exercise is not only a continuum of tension but also a process of preparing for sports training and rehabilitation.

Myth #1. Adding Eccentric Training Creates Excessive Soreness

A common fear among strength coaches, especially at higher levels, is the reported discomfort of elite athletes after heavy eccentric training. Even worse, some athletes overreact to simple DOMS (Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness) from even the most gentle of workouts. So coaches must look at readiness and athlete confidence from training. Some coaches, especially soccer and baseball, battle cultural stigmas with weight training. So if coaches are already getting flack from weight training at low levels, many of them don’t want to even think about eccentric training.

The truth is that avoiding soreness backfires in the long run. Coaches who cater toward removing the eccentric phase paint themselves into a corner later. I have seen trap-bar deadlifts, step-ups, and hip bridges used as a way to activate. This leads to poor eccentric ability later, and even more sluggish recovery. Durability comes from gradual adaption, not avoiding training or being overly aggressive.

Coaches who cater toward removing the eccentric phase paint themselves into a corner later. - Carl Valle
Click To Tweet

So what to do? The simplest course of action is to be more precise on loading and timing of the workout. No coach likes being blamed for injury, so what usually happens is the coach babysits vocal players. Based on research on creatine kinase, we tend to see the more explosive type athletes as more susceptible to soreness. The divas (read talented and slightly lazy) avoid training and have a legitimate point of the uniqueness of their responses to training. As athletes increase their ratio of explosive type II fiber, so do their total output and recovery demands.

Some research indicates that improvement without DOMS is possible, and that also applies to eccentric-heavy options. The solution is an incremental build-up (slow progression) and opportunistic timing (early in the offseason). So while soreness is normal and part of training, eccentric training doesn’t need to be crippling to be effective. Just like regular training, a focus on eccentrics can be done without excessive soreness. A good rule of thumb is the more soreness in the offseason, the less soreness in the regular season.

Myth #2. Eccentrics Must be Slow to Reap Benefits

Another myth is that eccentric training needs to be this slow countdown of lowering weights only. Eccentric training is usually equated with tempo work, and coaches may think about metronomes or Viking ship drums as a representation of that training option. Poliquin and King have helped the profession by creating more articulation of rep prescription, but eccentric training is not just a heavy and slow overload option. Depth jumps and sprinting, along with other ballistic actions, can increase the eccentric contributions of muscles. Most coaches worry about weight on the bar being too high and a risk to athletes; very few think about body velocity or box height. My earlier articles have shared the Reactive Strength Index and quantifying speed with electronic timing, but what I should have talked about is the length of negative work that can interact with an eccentric load. All of this can get complicated, so a smart way to looking at things is this classification of velocity and external and internal loading:

• Rapid contraction internal load (locomotive height)
• Rapid contraction internal load (jumping height)
• Intermediate contraction load (loaded jumps)
• Slow contraction external load (weight training)
• Slow contraction internal load (body training)

Video 1. Light Squat Jumps help with reinforcing squatting patterns and transitioning to more rapid eccentric action.

There is not too much middle ground here since most training seeks to create a clear contractile signal. That usually means running fast or doing heavy lifting. While plyometrics and loaded jumps are common, most early progress comes from absolute extreme training. Over time, more power-based options versus speed and strength modalities will become a better method, as coaches want to develop more force through shorter time periods.

Research is not clear on the phenomena of new or different exercises causing soreness. One theory is that a less-coordinated contraction leads to more fiber ruptures from poor inhibition recruitment. Simply stated, change or unfamiliar exercise may increase DOMS, but that is just theory. I like gradual transitions—what most coaches call blending—by slowly migrating to new exercises or transitioning smoothly to new workouts or phases.

As you can see from the list above, eccentrics don’t need to involve super-slow training protocols from the 1980s. They can be ballistic. Moving away from slow overloads with very heavy weights to a spectrum or pallet of contractile patterns is how coaches can find ways to introduce effective training options.

Myth #3. Eccentrics Makes Athletes Stiff and Tight

It’s true that eccentric training creates some feelings of being tight. Stiffness is more of a sensation of swelling (meaning free proteins), and other leakage makes the body feel restricted. The truth, though, is that good eccentric training is the best way to get muscle length. Sound eccentric training will increase lower body flexibility, according to the British Journal of Sports Medicine. I have used eccentric work and over time the injury resilience benefits with adductors and hamstrings have shown up time after time.

So what’s the sweet spot? The art of eccentrics is to minimize stiffness but still get length. That means progressive overload with repeated and simple programming, not expecting much over a few weeks but rather over several months. Coaches can see dramatic changes over the years when athletes commit in the offseason and preserve the range in the competitive season. This is very hard in elite soccer, because the longer the season the shorter the preparation phases. Marco Cardinale points out the limits of elite soccer here, and the trick is to make progress incremental and be patient.

Think about the average strength coach. He is likely working with an athlete over three years—sometimes less, sometimes more. Some coaches will give up using eccentrics and say “I will try next year” as they are all or none. Even one set done right will build into more sets or higher loads. I have a saying that I don’t care if you lift pink dumbbells from the fitness class, make sure you lift powder blue dumbbells eventually. Over time rivers make canyons, and the secret is to do what you can and not give up on anything. At youth levels, we see many selfish programs that jump to advanced training because the coaches want to be advanced. That haste ruins it for later when coaches at advanced levels have to deal with the lack of a proper foundations.

I recently had a great conversation with muscle physiologist Dr. David Opar. It was like an open book about hamstring injuries. His discussion was pure—no marketing nonsense, just straightforward science. The research was crystal clear—hamstring length and hamstring strength matter. The length he was talking about was fascicle length, not crude range of motion. If I had to do things over in my career, one certainly would be investing in people who use sonography to measure year-to-year changes.

In Dr. Opar’s research, longer hamstrings increase the success of returning to play or reducing injury. Hamstring strength and length are more important than athlete symmetry. As I have often said publicly, too many programs baby athletes and worry about symmetry without strength. Being symmetrically weak isn’t helpful, as a strength reserve is a great investment for athlete health.

Myth #4. Eccentrics Are Only for Elite Athletes

I am at fault for possibly being part of the problem by showing elite athletes on YouTube. This publicity could lead many people to assume eccentrics is something done only at that level. A better way of thinking is that eccentrics is for anyone at any age and any level. Eccentrics is more popular with elites because world-class athletes look for a Holy Grail to get better when they hit a plateau. Things get questionable when athletes feel like they need to shock the system. Instead of a simple progression of what to do with eccentrics, I will share examples of how we are already generally doing a good job.

Physical Education – Teaching a child to land carefully is eccentric training. Progression is simple with pedagogical challenges from doing movements on one leg instead of two, or something a little faster. Absorbing energy is important, but PE often gets robbed of time and money. If schools focused on PE as a primary way to improve total body and mind health, we would see amazing things in the classroom as well. Cutting programs early means athletes will be cutting class later or getting cut for surgery down the road.

Youth Development – Teaching kids basic control of their bodies when doing pull-ups involves focusing on lowering rather than how many reps they can do on their own. A bout of 3×5 negatives builds more strength faster than fooling around with bands. I believe that bands are great if used carefully, but partner-assisted negatives on pull-ups is a great way to build teams and focus on body control.

Rehabilitation – The key with injured athletes and regular Joes is to get range and start remodeling. The research on Insulin Growth Factor -1 with eccentrics is something exciting to coaches. But remember, sports medicine is mainly submaximal training and more manual therapy—so think early eccentrics. I shared a great example of early eccentric use to help muscle turnover and healing with my article on the best exercises here. If I had to do it again, I would have written a general science of eccentrics article first. The key is aggressively remodeling the tissue. But being sane and careful is the cornerstone to getting better.

Elite Sport – While Olympic sport is about maximizing output and team sport is about optimizing (Hakan Andersson 2012), you still need to challenge adaptation. Most coaches chase their tails in circles looking for a better way when in reality the ways they came up with are likely good enough, and they need to be more precise. A lot of suggestions exist regarding loading percentages and other formulas, but the truth is that linear progression works best. Those who are looking to “shock” the system or “bust through barriers” are usually suffering from poor program design. From time to time, a more aggressive form of training is needed, but making sure one is doing as much as necessary instead of as much as possible (Henk Kraaijenhof) is still the name of the game.

As you can see, there is plenty of room for eccentrics at all levels and all purposes. The art is determining the precise dose with the appropriate population in the correct form at the right time.

Myth #5. Eccentrics Slow Down Athletes

Many coaches fear eccentrics slows down athletes. Several plausible reasons exist why this may be true. Bodybuilding with a focus on hypertrophy for the sake of getting bigger without trying to be faster and more explosive may indeed create a bigger but slower athlete. If all you do is train slow, you may still get faster but not as fast as someone who does both speed and eccentric training. Finally, a focus on strength training without power and speed training will not create favorable adaptions. Type IIX fiber, the fastest and most explosive isoform, only improves during resting. Some coaches have misinterpreted the research and assumed that any hypertrophy will slow an athlete down. The myofibril versus sarcomere hypothesis popular ten years ago is not true, and fascicle lengthening has been researched to be a potential mechanism for faster contractile elements.

Figure 1. The developers of the Nordbord understand the value of eccentric exercise to rehabilitation and injury reduction when it comes to hamstrings.

The best way to get faster is to have eccentrics prepare for the hierarchy of priorities. Sports performance is usually a set of compromises and combinations since no one quality can be a winning ticket to stardom. When thinking about improving athlete speed and the use of eccentrics, focus on the following:

Athlete injury reduction – We have already talked about preventing injuries, but it’s important to note that staying healthy and having more time for great training is much better than having genius training on paper but nursing a hamstring pull. I have focused on aggressive injury reduction techniques early and touch-up work throughout the season. Eccentrics once a week will not last more than 3-4 months of competing, so it’s a wise bet to do it twice and keep the second session to 1-2 sets.

Athlete foundational strength – General and comprehensive programs elicit eccentric responses without having to resort to artificial overload protocols. Not to overcomplicate things, a good way to think of foundational strength is sticking to the classics and maintaining constant and safe tension. I think the reason the tempo training that Poliquin and King advocated worked in the past was not because special timing numbers were magic, it just reinforced good lifting. A slower tempo usually meant it was under control. A longer time frame means full range and tension on the muscle and tendon, not falling and bouncing on passive connective tissue. We need more polishing of the basics and less new and cute exercise ideas.

Athlete speed – After the two above elements are added, an athlete is more likely to have a chance of running faster than by not doing the progressions. Eccentric work rapidly via reactive options and maximum speed or natural overspeed options (wind) can help athletes provided they can handle the opportunities. Athletes who sprint and do eccentrics with propulsive muscle groups may see speed changes just from better muscle architecture.

A Word of Caution

Any exercise can be dangerous if done wrong or implemented incorrectly. Eccentric training is not evil or risky; it’s actually more friend than foe. The problem is that some coaches get carried away with experimentation and become more mad scientist rather than good sport scientist. In working with athletes, treat them as people, not biological tissue or “organisms.” A helpful book is Coach like a Mother, which my former athletic director gave me.* The book is about connecting with athletes. We tend to think about pushing athletes to get better versus being a guide. I think eccentrics need to be treated like any other option—being responsible and educated.

*Small world—my AD was an awesome track athlete whose strength coach was Mike Woicik, currently with the Dallas Cowboys. Mike was a very good discus thrower who may still hold his league record.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

Ask a dozen coaches what they do in the weight room for power testing and you will almost certainly get a dozen answers. Most mention something maximal, like a jump or lift. It’s likely that few have heard of the Raptor Test, let along actually put it into practice. I didn’t invent the Raptor Test, but it’s my passion and test of choice in most situations. The beauty of the test is its accessibility and simplicity. Even better, it has a secret benefit— the rich amount of information you obtain by using it every week.

In this article, I will break down the benefits because I already outlined the exercise protocol here. I did discuss some general reasons why I like the test. But the devil is indeed in the details, and it’s wise to know the foundational principles why this test trumps most other options. Some of these time-consuming, expensive, and impractical options may have merit, but the key is data used in the field, not just in 6-week research studies. This is about the need to service strength and conditioning coaches, not live in fantasy worlds.

The name came when I realized doing “countermovement tests” didn’t have the appeal of saying we were doing the “Bosco” tests. When I coined Raptor, some athletes seemed even more interested. Naming a training session with military terms or fighter planes (the F-22) or Jurassic Park dinosaurs is an easy way to get American football players’ attention. Sports medicine likes it because it focuses on fatigue and eccentric abilities, and team coaches get interested because it does indeed show data.

To review, here is the test protocol. Note that this test is designed for teams looking for solid data in a world in which time is precious and the need for applied sport science is high.

• Step 1: Perform 5 separate squat jumps with a barbell (hex or conventional)
• Step 2: Perform 5 separate counter-movement jumps (with bar)
• Step 3: Perform 6-8 continuous elastic jump squats (with bar)
• Step 4: Train lower body or total body power with some decision-making based on the testing data. My suggestion is to train as prescribed, decrease load, or recovery rep ranges and weight. As the season progresses and athletes become more experienced and advanced, the reps needed in Steps 1 and 2 for data integrity can decrease.

Some athletes like warming up with bar complexes while others like squat jumps. The entire process can be part of the warmup, the warm-down, or warmup and training. The test is open, meaning it is flexible based on coaching philosophy and needs analysis.

The test should be done in the squat rack or area where multiple people can train. I like a 1:4 ratio of bars to athletes. You can use conventional Olympic bars or ultra-light teaching barS (less than 15 pounds). Swapping out teaching bars for training bars goes very quickly with groups.

Without delay, here are the big five reasons why strength coaches have fallen in love with doing the basics well.

The Raptor Test is Safe and Simple

Some coaches ask, why not use length versus vertical power? I always explain that landing with long jumps or triple jumps is a mixed bag. I test horizontal jumping with Olympic sports (though not swimmers) but not team sports.

First, landing is a skill that can improve performance but not power. Force plate analysis of some athletes I have worked with reveals moderate improvements from training in the power indices (training changes, no big deal here) and distances improved because they learned to be more aggressive in landing.

Second, I believe in training absorption mechanics, but standing long jump or broad jumping is very specific and not useful for most sports. Testing familiarization will eventually wash out improvements from learning the test, but the nature of the broad jump makes it hard to see different types of contractions (squat jump, countermovement jump, and repeated jump) so I like vertical jumps.

The Raptor Test is a composite of three separate tests sequenced together. That means that each test is valuable by itself but compounds in value over time. I like the test because it is based on other tests we are familiar with, such as the Carmelo Bosco tests. The flow to more ballistic and dynamic motion has progression qualities in the sequence because repeatedly jumping without warming up spooks coaches. I have not seen injuries with vertical testing though one MLS team had a player break his foot (fifth metatarsal) during the preseason. Technically no physical test is risk-free, but I would rather hedge my bets with testing rather than hope for the best and not know what is going on.

The Raptor Test Is Team-Friendly

The Raptor Test is practical for groups, goes quickly, and doesn’t diminish training time. When I coached high school I didn’t have any VBT or force plate options, but now I think it’s possible and a good idea to have a set-up for upperclassmen. Several college coaches can obtain bar speed indices done in groups for each rep; I just want it done weekly or every other week as part of a workout.

Workflow is the name of the game because most good performance programs lose impact in collecting data when the testing has little training effect. There are several reasons for using a training bar (less than 15kg) and a normal 20kg Olympic bar, but the main rationale is that they allow the use of Velocity Based Training sensors. In addition to providing a place to mount the sensor or attach a Linear Positional Transducer, the hands remain in one location, like the protocol for the Bosco tests. Finally, the light load is a gentle reminder that gravity is still present, and the test must be performed with a high effort.

Figure 1. Most teams need a solution that can be done in a conventional weight room, so it’s important that a rack becomes embedded with the pressure sensors or the VBT tool is integrated with the squat rack.

The most important point of the Raptor Test is that it’s “minimally invasive,” meaning it doesn’t interfere with training. Since every coach should have light warmup tests to teach movements and prepare for intense training, it’s a great option for teams trying to get data without losing precious training time.

Just doing vertical jumps is fine, but the most common way of testing is to buy a few contact mats or one force plate and run a lot of athletes through at once. That means long lines and bored athletes. I believe that naked (no-load) jumps are paramount, but that is testing, not training. Raptor Testing with a load does get some small amount of work in, especially with the repeated squat jumps. While it will not make anyone a monster and is not a complete workout, it’s part of one.

Many athletes can be tested quickly because everyone uses the same load. Using the bar by itself means no weight changing, which in turn means faster cycling. Using a universal weight means coaches must be cognizant of how light and weaker athletes respond to a relatively higher load, and conversely how heavy and strong athletes respond to a light load. Still, the key is the speed of testing, and it can be integrated nicely into the training sessions.

The Raptor Test Is Data-Rich

Obviously three tests are going to give you at least three data points. Each jump set offers a series of scores to evaluate. The high frequency of testing allows coaches to see long-term trends. So why is the Raptor Test so “data rich?” The value is mining more information from the relationships of the different jumps when compared, and the details of each rep when drilled down. Here is a short list of areas that can be data-mined with the Raptor Test:

• Comparison of the jump performances over time or a season
• Analysis of each rep performance during a set for athlete profiling
• Evaluation of depth of center of mass during repeated jump squats
• Displaying the Reactive Strength Index-Modified with advanced athletes
• How the Eccentric Utilization Ratio improves or decays during the season
• Revealing the ability to become more elastic with repeated jumping

Obviously we can go on and on with all of the information one can get from testing the simple jump series. Many coaches want more than mean or peak power. For example, a lot of VBT scores are bar-speed summaries, a great guide for reinforcing speed of the movement.

What is missing with a lot of coaching is the deeper analysis—how rapidly is force created or transmitted? Most coaches see the concentric data, but the way the athlete loads and how negative work (eccentric qualities) is interacting is very important. With modern VBT devices, one can get every rep and the force time milestones wirelessly sent to cloud tools and AMS products. Hundreds of quality and unique data points are being captured, and the visualizations required to appreciate what is going on will be the next challenge.

The Raptor Test Is Scientifically Sound

Is the Raptor Test worth it? Its validity is only as good as the adherence to the protocol and procedures, as well as the honest effort of the athlete. The test does have some question marks. Potential areas may make the Raptor Test at risk for false positives and negatives for monitoring, so coaches need to take every round of testing with a grain of salt. I am not saying the Raptor Test has problems with validity or other statistical issues. EVERY TEST has baggage because athletes are more complicated than mere summaries of anatomy and physiology books.

Motivation and arousal with any volitional tests must be factored in. My strongest warning with jump testing is that every data point is bogus if the athlete is not putting in an honest effort since it’s expected that they are maximally trying. Maximal means all-out effort, something hard to achieve with athletes who are lazy, tired, or bored. Buying into the tests is vital, or athletes will simply go through the motions. Pump them up too much and they burn out. Treating the session like a casual training session makes the data unreliable. Coaching is about presence, and I suggest maintaining a strong burn but never get too high or too low to ensure getting repeatable scores.

What value does jump testing have for athletic performance and injury reduction? We see a recent rise (no pun intended) in jump testing, but what must be agreed on is the purpose and value of the data. Jump testing has some relationship with talent though the ability to jump high doesn’t mean one will run fast.

Figure 2. LPT and Accelerometers are good tools for coaches who don’t have access to a force plate, but it’s prudent to see how each model corresponds to a research instrument. The chart above is from 4 years ago (Crewther 2011l) , so it’s important to see how companies update their algorithms and firmware.

In addition to transfer, jump testing may reveal fatigue, but in modern sport schedules its magnitude is unique to each athlete. Some athletes have huge amounts of willpower. When they show up on game day, adrenaline takes over. Some athletes who are tired during testing seem to manifest fatigue in games. The key point here is that the Raptor Test is not comprehensive. Other data sets must give it context, or it’s just interesting jump data.

The construction of the tests has elements that may decrease precision and accuracy when administrating it, but only if athletes are not fit or strong. Using a barbell solves the upper body contribution to the jumps by focusing on leg power, but it does cause some issues with athletes who are not explosive to have poor data relationships if they are too young. College athletes should not have a problem, but a freshman running cross country in high school isn’t going to get much out of this test.

A lot of research on the use of loaded jumps shows that a load will change the force-time characteristics. My only fear is that elastic contributions of the CMJ (countermovement jump) will make barbell use a problem. The solution to this is experience and getting athletes better and sometimes bigger. Body fat is dead weight. Many coaches who worry about the dead weight of the bar interfering with the integrity of the eccentric abilities must realize that 3% extra fat on a linebacker makes a difference as well.

So the smart idea is to look at the tests without a bar and see if the significance matters. I don’t see any problems with the test among explosive athletes in any of the steps. The Raptor Test doesn’t replace the traditional Reactive Strength Index due to specificity considerations, but the RSI-Modified can be done with the Raptor Test with very good outcomes. I like to see10–15% improvement in the scores before I feel something is truly adapting in the body.

Coaches must be looking for data that jumps out at them (again no pun intended) when eyeballing the raw data. While advanced filtering and analysis are important to see minimal worthwhile or true statistical changes, the nature of the test is that we are looking for trends that mean real actionable choices, not something fascinating on podcasts. My problem is trying to see too much meaning in small details, whereas the reality is that I must see the most solid decisions such as training volume or timing of rest. Good goals of the Raptor Test include

• Am I developing more explosive athletes over a part of a career?
• Are we doing the same amount of work but sequencing smarter for better rest?
• Is something in the data showing why our athletes are getting more or less injured?

Of course, longitudinal testing can reveal other questions from coaches and athletes are looking for. Yet the Raptor Test can provide a universal solution such questions.

The Raptor Test Plays Nice with Others

An appealing quality of the Raptor Test is its flexibility and general usefulness. The Raptor Test is vanilla with nothing new being brought to the table, but it represents an applied and modern approach to current sports performance. Many tests are unique to the situation or environment while very few are universal and valuable. The response that I often see with coaches is that it works for them, not that they are finding a way to make it work into their program. The testing doesn’t matter if it’s a small group of athletes training for the Olympics or a large high school trying to manage dozens of athletes.

A Raptor Test can churn out 24 athletes per hour if testing in isolation (lack of equipment) or 24 athletes in 10 minutes with six properly set up sensor stations. Ten minutes may sound like a lot of time, but there is some training effect and also teaching of core movements, such as squatting patterns and jumping motions. The Raptor Test will never intrinsically build monsters, but it helps shape athletes and measure their development.

In closing, coaches may want to use a part of the test and change different elements. That is fine. Nothing wrong with doing a CMJ test every week with the bar for information, as that may not be a Raptor Test. But at least the idea of doing some testing before warming up in the weight room is better than every quarter bringing out the jump mat to get “numbers.”

I have seen some coaches just use the EUR (eccentric utilization ratio) and repeated jump squats to see if their athletes are fatiguing over the set or a series of sets. I don’t like going past eight reps as the athletes tend to pace themselves and this clouds the data. The main theme here is seeing the Raptor Test as a process to get more out of the data and the relationships of multiple bouts of effort rather than “best score” or “mean values.”

Regarding the Culture of the Raptor Test

My parting pearl of wisdom is that all of the above benefits are great. But when it comes down, athletes are athletes and team coaches are team coaches. The strength coach has a responsibility to engage both. I love the Raptor Test because it makes the old new again, especially with technology.

I am not against tests that show loads (max squat or max clean) but I find those too risky politically to base a program on. I find the transfer of heavy loads poor to speed beyond solid numbers like 2xBW or 1.5xBW respectively. Converting to wattage so team coaches see thousands of watts instead of hundreds of pounds creates a fresh look at training and removes the unnecessary addiction to max load as an evaluator of the program.

I suggest using the Raptor Test or making your own series of tests as part of the warming up process. It encourages athletes to train smarter and harder from the instant feedback and long-term development information it provides.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Vickie Saunders, The Sponsorship Consultants

It is important for athletes to understand what sponsorship is and what it isn’t. It isn’t about getting something for free, that is called charity, and while it may appeal on some levels, you would be missing out on a host of benefits that sponsorship offers.

So what is Sponsorship?

Think of it as a relationship that exists to provide agreed benefits and, like any relationship, if it’s nurtured it can develop into something very valuable and long lasting. Conversely, just like any relationship, if it’s taken for granted and neglected, or there is dishonesty, then it is unlikely to grow and likely to end.

What Sponsorship Isn’t

Sponsorship is not a donation. A donation is where the benefit goes one way, with sponsorship you receive a benefit in return for giving a comparative benefit back. The opportunities and unexpected benefits of engaging in sponsorship relationships will far outweigh the short-term gain from receiving donations.

Sponsorship is not about getting something for free. Sponsorship relationships should be developed, negotiated, and strategic so that both parties receive maximum gain.

Sponsorship relationship between athlete and company should maximize gain for both parties.
Click To Tweet

Expelling Some Myths about Sponsorship

There are so many misconceptions about what sponsorship is, what it isn’t, who can get it, and who can’t. They are just myths.

MYTH #1 THERE’S NOT ENOUGH

The biggest myth is that there isn’t much sponsorship around because of the ‘current economic climate’. There is an ABUNDANCE of sponsorship available; it’s all about connecting with the right companies in the right way, and being able to offer valuable return on their investment.

MYTH #2 I DESERVE IT. I DON’T DESERVE IT

There are some athletes who believe that their athletic achievements automatically qualify them for being sponsored. They have a sense of entitlement and think that companies should be knocking down their door with offers and that just being a good athlete is all they need to offer their sponsors.

The reality is, even David Beckham and Usain Bolt have to do more than play football or run 100 metres. They attend media events, photo shoots, are involved in marketing campaigns, and many other activities that provide the true commercial value for their sponsors.

MYTH #3 IT’S TOO HARD TO GET

There is work involved in engaging and maintain sponsorship, but the rewards far outweigh the efforts. The key is having a plan, taking the actions and making sure you are approaching the right companies, in the right way, and offering the right things in return.

Simple things like picking up the phone rather than just sending off an email to someone you’ve never contacted before can help get the ball rolling with your potential sponsors. It’s not rocket science, and it’s not that hard!

Types of Sponsorship

There are many types of sponsorship and despite what you may hear people saying there is more than enough to go around.

Financial – You receive payment for your engagement as a sponsored athlete, this may include product and service also!

Product – Your sponsors provide you with the products that you use in your sport or your everyday life.

Service – This can be anything from physio and massage, right through to accounting or graphic design!

Affiliate – Based on your performance on or off the sporting field, your sponsor provides you with either payment or product/service when you achieve certain targets i.e. you have a code that you can share with all your followers to make purchases with your sponsor, and you get a percentage of that.

Ambassador – You are a representative of that company or organisation (perhaps a charity), and while you may be paid, one of the greatest benefits will be a boost to your profile and network.

The Benefits of Being a Sponsored Athlete

Athletes seek sponsorship for various reasons, with the main one being to reduce the financial strain of participating in their sporting activities.

The reduction of this financial strain can mean that the athlete may be able to work reduced hours, or not at all, to focus on their training and events, or it may mean that though they continue employment, they can now set their sights on even bigger or more frequent event participation.

The great thing about being a sponsored athlete is that it’s about so much more than simply getting your costs of being an athlete covered.

The benefits of sponsorship include:

• Reducing the costs of your sport, and taking financial pressure off you and your family!
• Being able to use the products and services you want i.e. the very best equipment that’s just right for you, or getting a great coach or regular massage and physio.
• Option to reduce your work hours – and train (and recover!) more
• Financial freedom
• Ability to participate in all the events you want to and not having to choose because you can’t afford to attend them all.
• Create strong networks and opportunities!

The Unexpected Benefits of Being Sponsored

There are so many tangible benefits, but there are also some that are not so obvious but equally if not MORE valuable such as:

• You open doors to new opportunities and networks
• Your professional and personal skills will be developed
• All of the things that you offer sponsors as benefits to them actually benefit you (increased media and social media activity and increased audience)
• You will increase your own network (fans and followers) and grow your profile as an athlete
• You will find it easier to get more sponsors, as you have experience and proof that you are a great investment!
• There may be career opportunities that arise during or after your sporting ‘career.’
• On a personal level it’s incredibly exciting, confidence boosting and ironically quite humbling to be sponsored by a company who can see the true value that you offer them through your sporting and non-sporting activities.
• The stress that is alleviated for those athletes seeking substantial sponsorship (which may then mean they only need to work part-time or not at all) can have an incredible effect on their performance!

The 3 Phases of Athlete Sponsorship

Figure 1.The three phases of athlete sponsorship.

Phase 1 OBTAIN

The initial phase is where all the groundwork is laid and requires the most effort.

It is during this phase that requirements are identified, potential sponsors are identified and researched, and sponsorship proposals are created. Once sponsorship has been engaged, we move into Phase 2.

Phase 2 MAINTAIN

Using the information generated in Phase 1, athletes will activate their relationships with their sponsors, and this will typically coincide with their competition season….so being organized and having a plan to work off is crucial!

Phase 3 RETAIN

Typically at the end of the contract term, this phase is a time to reflect, review and hopefully if all has gone well, renew the arrangement for another year.

Identifying Your Needs

During this process, you’ll be looking at what you want out of sponsorship, beyond products, services and finance. Are you looking to increase your profile as an athlete in the media?

Are you looking for partnerships with companies who share your vision about something? Perhaps you’re thinking ahead and wanting to develop your professional skills and networks for a career during and after competitive sport.

Identifying Potential Sponsors

You will be amazed at how many companies you have some kind of connection with, and chances are your potential sponsors will be ones you are already connected with.

Use the following categories to create your initial list:

• Brands and services you currently (or would like to!) use
• Companies that your friends and family are connected with
• Local business’s in your community
• Business’s that you are already a customer to…..and may not have anything to do with sport i.e. beauty products, groceries, transport etc.
• Businesses who sponsor your sport, your events, or other athletes in your sport

Research

Find out as much as you can about the companies you’ve identified as a good match, and get an understanding of what they’re about; what does their marketing activity look like, do they sponsor other athletes, do they participate in any corporate sporting events or do they have any employee health programmes?

Find out as much as you can via the internet and your existing contacts, and then get in contact with the marketing or sponsorship manager to get any other key information to ensure your proposal really hits the mark!

Creating a List of Benefits

It’s my belief and experience that your results on the sporting field have little to do with getting sponsored, and that it’s OTHER factors that make sponsorship a valuable investment for companies.

It’s social media, brand promotion, media coverage, verbal endorsement at events, having a brand ambassador and a heap of other benefits that you can offer sponsors.

Perhaps you’re good at public speaking and can offer a few hours of your time during the year, or you could offer to run a team building session for your sponsor’s staff (or to their clients!).

Social media is brilliant when done right, so look at how you can offer an increased platform for your sponsors through your existing or soon to be increased networks!

Get creative, step outside your comfort zone, and look for unique and valuable ways to give back to your sponsors!

Through your research, you should have a fairly clear idea of what the company may be looking for, so your benefits should align with this and of course should be commensurate with what you’re asking for from the company in terms of value!

Creating Sponsorship Proposals

Make sure the focus is always on the company, not on you.

Be clear and concise, let them know why you are contacting them specifically and how it will benefit them to sponsor you. Outline your achievements and future plans, and paint the picture of just how awesome it will be to work together! Use great photos and make the document look fantastic, and really represent you and your style!

Be clear on what you’re asking for and what you’re offering. Make sure that you make it as concise as possible because the aim is to get them to read all of the document. Make sure you tailor each proposal for each individual sponsor!

If you’re not good at design or writing or you don’t have any killer photos of you in action, get help! Ask around, you’ve probably got people in your existing network who ARE good at this stuff and will be happy to help you!

Sending proposals

Make sure you have already spoken to your potential sponsors….face to face is optimal, over the phone is good, email is a very last resort.

Make sure they are expecting your proposal, and once you’ve sent it (usually via email) follow up with a phone call to confirm they’ve received it and to find out when they’d like to discuss it with you.

5 Do’s

1. Give yourself plenty of time to engage sponsors, at least three months
2. Treat sponsorship as a business relationship
3. Spend time figuring out exactly what you need sponsorship for
4. Research potential sponsors and only align with brands that are a good fit with you based on your needs, ambitions, and values and what you can give back to the company
5. Find out what your sponsors want by asking them

5 Don’ts

1. Don’t send a proposal without making contact with the company first (face to face is gold, over the phone is good, email or other social media is ok but really a last resort if phone or face to face aren’t possible).
2. Make your proposals too long or too much about you – the focus should be on the sponsors and how this will benefit them
3. Rush into sponsorships with company’s you know nothing about or are not aligned with your values
4. Worry if some of them say no. Be thankful that they have given you a straight answer and that you are moving closer to getting a YES from another company, the RIGHT company!
5. Just send your proposal documents and wait for a reply. Be proactive (but not a total stalker!) and follow up a few days after sending.

Summary

By doing all the activities in the three stages you will be setting a new benchmark for your sponsors as I can almost guarantee you that not many other athletes will be offering such a professional, valuable and well developed return on investment for their sponsors.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Matt Gifford, NX Level

The acceleration ladder or tape drill dates back to the Cold War era. In debunking this exercise, formerly termed “East German Stick Drill,” one may take a look and think it was created to elicit disharmony in the speed and power athlete of the United States. The application is often butchered greatly by coaches and athletes alike. Hearsay has it that the Soviet Block countries were using this drill some time ago.

Remi Korchemny, the author of Innovations in Speed Development, popularized the use of the stick drill to teach the bleed out and transitional component of the acceleration pattern from a static starting position. Korchemny prescribed a five to seven stride model for beginners and an initial 3-foot first stick placement. His progressions start with a lengthening of 15 cm (6 inches) per rung.

Korchemny and the East Germans left an imprint on early sprint speed coaches such as Tom Shaw and Gary Winckler who used it to develop field and sprint sport athletes. These highly acclaimed coaches helped create a strong mid-1990’s buzz. Naturally, the drill became extremely watered down via high school and collegiate level coaches and athletes. Mechanical sprint dysfunction and technical model disturbance are commonly created by allowing athletes to: maintain poor posture, cast/overreach, and focus too heavily on limb speed of movement.

Personally, I was a part of its incorrect implementation as a high school athlete in my football and track and field days. Many young athletes will develop an end goal thought, “This is where my foot needs to hit” rather than use the appropriate question, “what positions and feeling state will best get me there?” Furthermore, the drill isn’t a one size fits all model and is often used incorrectly in large group settings.

Charlie Francis expressed its flaws best when he asked these questions, “How can everybody be the same? Are you 5’6” or 6’6”? Sprinting is a hindbrain activity where simple functions can be performed at great speed. Adding complexity to a simple activity slows function down and encourages tightness, which is death to a sprinter.” We must remember the how always trumps the what!

Sprinting is a hindbrain activity where simple functions can be performed at great speed. - Charlie Francis
Click To Tweet

Over the last few years, the drill has made its way back into popular sprint culture. Vince Anderson, sprint coach at Texas A&M, has used the acceleration ladder with great success. Andersen worked previously with two of the greatest “starters” of all time in Leonard Scott (6.46 60m) and Justin Gatlin (6.45 60m and 9.74 100m) at the University of Tennessee. He now produces great sprinters at A&M under his unique philosophy which incorporates the stick drill nearly every day. Renowned Altis World sprint coaches Andreas Behm and Stuart McMillan prescribe this drill early in their training year to help establish rhythm and a sound technical model.

Marking the Athlete’s Pattern

The athletes stride length pattern will be dictated in regards to anthropometrics, power levels, surface of use, time of year, and technical comprehension. Less powerful athletes or athletes with short levers will likely have a zero mark to first cone mark of 2’6 to 3’0 feet. Likewise, an athlete with a greater power reserve or longer levers will likely start from 3’0 to 3’6 feet. In general, the median may be caught in prescribing somewhere near a “1.1” formula. Stride length from zero to the first stride x 1.1 for shorter stride length and 1.15 or slightly above for greater stride lengths. Coaches should not get lost in finding a perfect formula. (Note: Coach Anderson sells his own charts for youth to elite athletes)

Example:

• 0-1st Stride = 3 feet
• 1st-2nd Stride = 3.3 feet (3 x 1.1)
• 2nd-3rd stride = 3.6 feet (3.3 x 1.1)
• 3rd-4th = 4 feet (3.6 x 1.1)

What are you looking for?

Intent is everything! Aggressive push, punch, and extension should be coached from ground through the head. Promote a gradual rise of the athletes torso angles, hip height, and heel recovery in respect to the previously mentioned principals. Coaches should progress distances and number of sticks/cones according to desired intensity, athletes abilities, and technical mastery. One may start with only 3 to 5 markers and when appropriate progress to fifteen or more. Use slow-motion video to identify the athletes biomechanics and ground contact positions. Don’t get lost in a few inches here or there in which the athlete strikes behind or in front of markers. Look for the contact of the athletes foot to be underneath the center of mass and traveling backward. From here the athlete will focus on violently driving through a post that projects one up and forward while pushing the ground away. Free your athletes from thinking about “how fast I’m moving” and steer them towards a philosophy centered towards “what I’m feeling.”

Video 1. Sprinter demonstrates the acceleration ladder.

Video 2. Demonstration of acceleration ladder on inclined slope.

Important Points to Consider

• Use the stick drill early in the training year for rhythm and mechanics. It is best to increase intensity with respect to technical mastery and power (rate of force development) levels. Patient progressions produce powerful performers!
• Teach proper acceleration mechanics first. This drill doesn’t teach optimal acceleration position, rather the skill of accelerating to maximum velocity. Perfect forty or forty-five-degree position usually lasts but one stride. It is imperative to know that during one sprint bout rarely is two acceleration strides identical. Acceleration should always flow towards the end goal: maximal velocity position.
• Cues: “Push, Project, Post, Length = Power = Fast” (I will review external cues in another article)
• Teach gradual rise of torso angle, hip height, heel recovery, shin angle and arm position in relation to gender, skill, and power levels.
• The stick drill or acceleration ladder is time tested for the elite sprint athlete.
• Choose the population wisely for this drill. It may be best to shy away from implementing this with novice athletes, those with a low training age or level of kinesthetic awareness and in a large non-uniform group setting. Most often field sport athletes won’t utilize anything more than a three to six stride acceleration pattern and have to account for the chaos and randomness of their specific field sport environment and rules.
• Progress effectively and patiently. Repetition is the mother of skill.

Please share this article so others will benefit.

By Talen Singer

Every coach wants his or her student-athletes to achieve their best performances during any contest. This is especially true at meets as they are quantifiers, the sole measurement of production. As a coach, how can you enhance both immediate and future performance?

Coaches and athletes need to be invested in both performance and communication. Holding athletes accountable and being supportive when they fail to perform to the best of their ability is one of the pillars of creating a successful coach/athlete relationship. Good coaches know when to spark enthusiasm with a fiery speech or a soft whisper of “I know you can do this.” Great coaches understand that the primary success strategy to utilize on meet day is proper cueing. Cuing isn’t simply telling an athlete what they wrong or what you what them to do next. Tone, timing, and the ability communicate in verbiage that gives the athlete confidence in the immediate instruction are all part of successful cueing.

Coaches and athletes need to be invested in both performance and communication.
Click To Tweet

An effective and comprehensible cue system that will truly assist an athlete in the heat of competition is composed of four principles:

1. Keep all cues “positive”.
2. Do not instruct in the middle of the competition.
3. Maintain consistency in use of language.
4. Limit your feedback.

Keep All Cues Positive

“Positive” does not mean cheerleading, or smiling while you say everything. It means instructing the athlete without negative judgment. He may or may not know what he did wrong. The coach’s goal is not to have him focus or perseverate upon the negative, but to move forward toward success. The way to do this is to convey verbally to the athlete exactly what he needs to change without mentioning the negative action observed.

Example: A pole-vaulter’s hands are late to plant. Anyone who has attended a meet has seen this happen and has heard a myriad of responses from coaches. “Your hands are late!” might be one response. This lets the athlete know what they did wrong, but it provides no instruction to remediate the error and therefore, zero encouragement. Positive cues in this scenario would include “push your hands on that second to last step!” or simply, “get your hand up earlier, that will get you into a better position at take off!”

The first statement is an observation; the latter two statements are cues. Effective cues shift the athlete’s perception from failure to progress. It engages him by actively coaching him to perform an action with which he is familiar. Observations, or improper cues, merely point out errors and leave the athlete without an instruction to improve his immediate performance.

Too often observations from coaches such as, “that was horrible!” or “what was that??” are commonly heard at meets. From the coach’s viewpoint, it can be frustrating, sometimes even heartbreaking, to see an athlete fail at something that involved months of hard work. But a negative observation is not going to help the athlete get back on point. Be an active coach, not an observer. Always cue the athlete in a positive way that will lead to immediate adjustments and fix the issues that made a jump go poorly.

Do Not Instruct in the Middle of the Competition

Simply put: long, involved explanations followed by multiple gestures between jumps are confusing to an athlete focused on competing. As discussed above, good cues are actionable changes that an athlete can make with a moment’s notice. In order for cues to be effective, they need to be definitive.

They should require little additional thought on the athlete’s part as they are referencing actions taught and drilled before the competition. While a cue is an instructional moment, it is not the time to teach new material.

Competent and enthusiastic coaches strive to provide great explanations. The day of the competition is not the time or the place for this knowledge exchange. Post competition meetings are the appropriate forum to explain the rationale and will further engender improved communication in future competitions.

Maintain Consistency in the Use of Language

Developing a consistent vocabulary that is utilized in both practice and competition is essential for athletes to stay in sync with coaches and each other during a meet. The team will function most effectively if every member speaks and comprehends the same “language.”

Example: At practice, a coach cues the athlete to bring the free leg through stronger, but then in the meet, the coach refers to it as a drive leg. The athlete, already in competition mode, will cognitively have to do a translation mid-meet to comprehend and process the coach’s instruction. Some coaches might say to move back a “shoe” while others say a “foot.”

Developing the team vocabulary should begin on the very first day of practice. Athletes arrive with a variety of experiences from different coaches and programs. Once consistency is established, it not only enhances performance but also unifies the athlete group.

Limit Your Feedback

The best coaches need very few words to make an adjustment in an athlete’s performance. The ability to be concise is learned through experience. It is a well-honed skill, and it takes time. Begin by prioritizing. Quickly list and then define the issues with the performance. Following that, discern which of the issues are fixable. Then, quickly determine which one or two adjustments can be made to facilitate a better immediate performance. Do all of this mentally, before even verbalizing the cue to the athlete.

The best coaches need very few words to make an adjustment in an athlete’s performance.
Click To Tweet

Example: A coach tells a high jumper that she is “drifting off the curve, coming at a bad angle, not getting the arms in the jump, and the step is close to the bar.” While these are all certainly astute observations of what may have taken place, how much of that information is useful, at that moment, to the athlete? None of those observations will empower the athlete to correct a technical error or instill confidence that the next jump will be better. In this example, the observation can be transformed into a cue by saying, “back up six inches and drive the line to get back to your solid approach.”

With this cue, the coaching becomes active by providing the athlete with concrete and definable actions to perform. These actions are familiar and have been practiced, so he can reference them easily, and the language used is understood because it is consistent. All of these factors allow the athlete to process the information without losing his flow and in turn, the coach has increased the athlete’s confidence. The process is subtle and inspirational. The athlete gets the message that the coach believes that the next jump will be better.
By using these four seemingly simple principles, a coach can establish a strong cuing system, but it takes an investment of time and consistent effort.

Example: Examine the coaching of takeoffs. There are many “like” cues in the different jump event take offs. While differing in angle and other actions, driving of the free leg or stable ankle position is an example of an actionable cue that crosses over. Crossover in between practice drills and competition actions are critical. For example, the use of take off cues while teaching the skips and run-run-jumps drills at practice. Postural cues and hip and shin alignment cues can all be developed and implemented during practice, where the pressure of competition is removed. This enables the athlete to follow the cue instruction with a much higher degree of accuracy on the day of the meet and make the changes needed to apply immediate improvement in the next attempt.

Great performances and great coaching are devoid of apathy. When actively coaching through the use of effective cues, it is possible to inspire excellence.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Marco Altini, HRV4Traning

Heart rate variability (HRV) is an important marker of an individual’s physiological stress level. Due to recent technological improvements in terms of computation power and accessibility to high-quality wearable technology we are seeing all sorts of applications making use of HRV today, from optimizing performance in sports, to monitoring psychological stress in the workspace, to quantifying meditation or better understanding chronic disease.

While HRV is a powerful tool and can be very helpful in better understanding physiological responses to both acute and chronic stressors, interpreting HRV data at the individual level is still challenging.

This post focuses on HRV in the context of monitoring training load and optimizing performance. In particular, I will go over the following:

• Best practices for short, practical measurements of HRV
• Day to day variability in response to training: acute HRV changes
• Understanding the big picture: multi-parameter trends

As best practices, I’ll cover the main methods each athlete or sports enthusiast should use to make sure the acquired data is reliable and can be used to help the decision-making process. This is mainly accounted for by taking care of being consistent during the measurements (body position, time of the day, paced breathing).

Once we have reliable data, HRV is typically analyzed in two ways; acute HRV changes and long-term trends. Acute changes refer to the easiest interpretation, i.e. on a day following intense training HRV is expected to drop. This is the principle on which most HRV apps, like HRV4Training, rely on to provide users with daily advice. While many factors can impact HRV on a daily basis, it is easier to analyze the impact of training on the following day’s HRV, compared to long-term trend analysis where more factors might be playing a role.

Higher HRV does not necessarily mean better condition and fitness.
Click To Tweet

In the context of understanding the big picture over the longer term, higher HRV does not necessarily mean better condition and fitness. HRV is a bit more complex. Thus, I will cover more explorative work that looks a multiple parameters to better grasp the full picture of physical condition (HRV baseline, or moving averages, as well as HRV variations, together with heart rate, normalized HRV, training load, and other relevant variables), and try to discriminate between periods of good adaptation to training, maladaptation, overtraining, and accumulating fatigue.

Best practices: what you should do to make sure your HRV data is meaningful

Technology

Up to a few years ago, HRV was used mainly by elite athletes and coaches or academic researchers working at the intersection of sports, health and medicine. Many of these experts were able to show links between HRV and performance as well as recovery or training load.

Figure 1. iPhone screen shots of the HRV4Training Application.

However, in the recent past many new, affordable and user-friendly tools have been developed. These tools typically rely on commercially available heart rate monitors (e.g. a Polar chest strap) to analyze data, compute HRV and provide guidance to the user (see for example ithlete, a clinically validated tool, or Elite HRV). Most of these apps rely on spot measurements of about 1 minute, while other tools provide more complex 24/7 solutions, like firstbeat.

The latest developments go even a step further in terms of usability and accessibility. With apps like HRV4Training, HRV can be computed accurately without the need for any external sensor or device. The main advantage is the increased compliance and reduced cost.

HRV4Training uses the phone camera to extract photoplethysmography (PPG, basically blood flow from the finger) and then determine markers of the autonomous nervous system activity, in particular, parasympathetic activity. PPG has been used for a long time in clinical settings and has been validated multiple times, proving to be a reliable measurement of HRV, as good as standard electrocardiograms with sticky gel electrodes [1, 2, 3]. Other apps also rely on PPG but using external sensors like ithlete’s finger sensor, which has been recently clinically validated by Flatt and Esco [4].

Regardless of the tool you decide to use, make sure the technology is reliable. For example, there are many optical watches out there, but almost all of them as of 2015 can only provide reliable HR, and not HRV, due to much averaging performed to stabilize the signal (check out this post for details).

Figure 2. Comparison between RR intervals extracted from a chest-worn Polar H7 sensor and the iPhone Camera using the signal processing techniques implemented in HRV4Training. The data was collected during a paced breathing exercise. Increases and decreases in RR interval values due to inhaling and exhaling are clearly visible in both traces.

From Data to Insights

By quantifying parasympathetic activity, HRV apps are able to translate the information into an assessment of training load and provide actionable insights on physical condition, helping users to better understand how their body responds to trainings and other important factors in life (e.g. sleep, stress, etc.) [5, 6, 7, 8].

However, taking advantage of the data is not that simple. We need to take care of a few extra steps to make sure the information we are collecting is reliable.

Clinical studies were carried out under very specific, strict, laboratory conditions. Typically, this meant showing up at a lab early in the morning, measuring 2 hours after a light breakfast and at rest, a pre-measurement period including up to 30 minutes lying down in the lab, and so. Even with the right tools, HRV can be difficult to gather under similar conditions when measured in the wild, and these difficulties can make interpretation harder.

Additionally, research showed that many factors influence HRV, from body posture to respiration, age, genetics, gender, physical exercise, chronic health conditions and more. So how can we get reliable insights from HRV data, if it is affected by so many factors?

Get your Baseline

We do so in two ways. First, we need to look only at measurements with respect to ourselves, which means we need to collect a baseline, or a series of recordings so that the effect of different stressors is always evaluated with respect to what are our normal values, without looking much at the general population.

Secondly, we also need to control for as many of the previous factors as we can, and then evaluate the effect of what we care about. For example, in the context of optimizing performance, apps like HRV4Training provide a set of simple rules (or best practices) so that the measurements your take at home are as close as possible to supervised laboratory recordings, and your data is more reliable.

Best Practices

Here are a few best practices for short HRV measurements that are very important to follow to get consistent results that can be interpreted correctly:

Measurement Time and Context

Take the measurement first thing after waking up, possibly while still in bed. This way you have consistent time of the day, and you are not affected by other stressors. A good exception is if you need to empty the bladder, in that case, do it, then go back, rest 1 or 2 minutes to make sure your body is not affected by physical activity, and then take the measurement. When you take the measurement, it’s very important to try to relax, and not to think about other factors that might be stressing you out, like what’s coming up during the day. Never read your email before the measurement!

Measurement Duration

Short, 60 seconds measurements have been validated multiple times [9], and you can trust a 60 seconds recording for rMSSD (time domain feature, more time is required for low-frequency analysis). You can see an example in the figure below.

Figure 3. rMSSD for 25 participants computed on windows between 10 seconds and 5 minutes.

Still, if you have the time and patience, longer measurements can provide a more stable condition and be less affected by artifacts. We can see from the plot above that even 10 seconds measurements have the same median value we have with 5 minutes measurements. However there is much variability between the values obtained overt 10 seconds and, therefore, longer windows provide better reliability and repeatability. 60 seconds is something the community seems to have settled for, as a good compromise between accuracy and practical applicability of the test for a consumer application.

Breathing is Key

According to literature, HRV features do not seem to be particularly affected by paced breathing, if we consider shallow breathing rates (> 10) or spontaneous breathing. However, baseline HRV (rMSSD) seems to be affected by breathing rate at the individual level, with higher HRV values corresponding to lower breathing rates (deep breathing).

Thus, paced breathing can be a simple way to stay focused on the measurement and limit other stressors. Measurement to measurement repeatability at constant breathing rates is good, even though there will always be differences between consecutive HRV measurements. These differences are typically lower than the differences due to changing breathing rate. As a suggestion for your measurements, I would advise using paced breathing at a breathing rate that is comfortable for you, i.e. not too fast or too slow, and stick to that for all your measurements. In general, it doesn’t matter what breathing frequency you pick, but be consistent, use the same every time.

Figure 4. Heart rate and rMSSD for different breathing rates measured during paced breathing for one participant. Shallow breathing shows lower rMSSD values (12 and 10 breaths per minute), compared to deep breathing (8 and 6 breaths per minute).

Body position

Lying, sitting or standing are all good positions, again what matters is consistency. For elite athletes, typically sitting or standing is preferable, to avoid saturation effects that can happen while lying down in individuals with extremely low heart rates. However, if you decide to stand, it’s very important to be patient, and wait a minute or two before starting the measurement, since your body needs to be at complete rest and measuring too early after standing up might cause the measurement to be affected.

Most apps make following best practices easy for you by providing 50 to 60 seconds measurements with paced breathing and suggesting a morning measurement as part of your routine:

Figure 5. HRV4Training, Elite HRV and ithlete are all providing guidance for measurement time of the day, duration and paced breathing, simplifying acquisition of consistent data.

Day to day variability in response to training: acute HRV changes

As mentioned above, once reliable, consistent HRV data is acquired, we typically analyzed it in two ways; acute HRV changes and long-term trends.

Simply put, monitoring parasympathetic activity via HRV can provide insights on physiological stress, with a higher level of stress resulting in lower HRV. For example, heavy training is responsible for shifting the cardiac autonomic balance toward a predominance of the sympathetic over the parasympathetic drive. This means that heavy training will typically reduce HRV as measured by common HRV tools (typically reporting rMSSD, a measure of parasympathetic activity, or a transformation of rMSSD on a scale between 0-10 or 0-100). Acute HRV changes refer to interpretations relying on this principle, i.e. on a day following intense training HRV is expected to drop.

Day to day HRV guidance based on acute HRV changes is very useful to make small changes to our overall training plan. If today we are down, we can easily adapt and move our intense training by a day, or make some other small adjustments.

Below is an example of this kind of analysis for my own data. The colors are the manual annotations in the HRV4Training app. In the top plot, we can see the rMSSD value each day and how I trained in terms of intensity. The bottom plot is the more interesting one. I shifted the labels. Therefore they don’t represent anymore how I trained that day, but how I trained the day before. This way we can see quickly the effect of training on HRV. For example, looking at the red bars in the bottom plot we see that HRV had a drop after intense trainings 5 times out of 6 annotated intense trainings. Average trainings, highlighted in orange, also are predominantly showing negative differences, i.e. a drop in HRV.

Figure 6. Example of day to day variability in rMSSD with respect to training intensity.

In the figure below, we can see the change in rMSSD the day after training (daily acute differences shown above). As “training condition” I included training at average and intense intensities, since easy trainings or recovery runs can have the opposite effect on HRV (i.e. HRV increase after easy training due to a stimulatory effect on parasympathetic activity). We can see the yellow distribution, representing rMSSD changes after average or intense trainings, being consistently below zero, meaning that rMSSD is typically reduced after training, and can be used as a measure of training load.

Figure 7. Effect of training on day to day rMSSD changes.

By looking at acute HRV changes longitudinally over weeks or months, we can get some better understanding of how we cope with trainings of different intensities.

HRV4Training provides new experimental features that do this analysis for you, when enough data is acquired:

Figure 8. Acute HRV changes automatically analyzed in HRV4Training.

Understanding the Big Picture: Multi-parameter Trends

While it is definitely interesting to look at HRV on a day to day variability basis and understand the impact of intense training sessions, much research is now trying to use this data to understand more about our overall condition over longer periods of time, weeks to months, in the context of a training program [10, 11, 12].

Questions we can try to answer are: How are we adapting to a new training plan? Is our physiological condition optimal while approaching a race or should we change something? Are we at risk of overtraining or accumulating fatigue?

From recent research, it is clear that HRV alone as traditionally analyzed cannot answer all these questions. When we look at HRV over longer periods of time, the common rule, which is higher HRV equals better condition, does not necessarily hold anymore.

However, by combining a series of physiological parameters and methods, we can learn more about our physical condition.

Figure 9. Daily and Baseline HRV.

By looking together at changes in baseline HRV (meaning our weekly averages over time) as well as looking at the variability within our HRV scores (for example, if our readings are jumping around a lot during a week or are pretty much the same score every day) together with information about heart rate and of course our current training program (meaning training load, intensity, and so on) there are some consistent patterns that we can identify.

For example, research showed that lower variability between readings together with a stable or increasing HRV baseline can be more representative of good adaptation to training while the same reduction in variability between readings when associated with higher HR and lower HRV baseline is more representative of fatigue.

So in this context looking at multiple parameters can help better understand what is going on and tools like HRV4Training are constantly evolving to bring this analysis in the app and do the math for you, so that you can use the information to further optimize your trainings.

Conclusion

HRV analysis is a great tool to monitor training load and adaptations to a training program. However, it’s very important to keep in mind that data should be collected under consistent conditions, in order to be reliable and meaningful during interpretation.

Analysis of acute HRV changes can be particularly useful in making day to day adaptations to a training plan, and understand how we are responding to different types of training. However, in order to look at the bigger picture a multi-parameter approach is necessary, since when we look at HRV over longer periods of time, the common rule, which is higher HRV equals better condition, does not necessarily hold anymore.

Much of the work on multi-parameter trends was carried out during the very recent past and is a very active area of research. Thus, we are likely to see more research in the next few years combining not only multi-parameter physiological data, but also subjective scores (how an athlete is feeling) as well as other relevant metrics (e.g. sleep quality), and data analytics tools able to combine these parameters and provide athletes and coaches with more insights to aid the decision making process.

For questions, inquiries, and feedback about HRV, contact me on Twitter at @marco_alt or visit my blog at HRV4Training.

Please share so others may benefit.

References

1. Russoniello, C. V., et al. “A measurement of electrocardiography and photoplethesmography in obese children.” Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback 35.3 (2010): 257-259.
2. Lu, Sheng, et al. “Can photoplethysmography variability serve as an alternative approach to obtain heart rate variability information?.” Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 22.1 (2008): 23-29.
3. HRV4Training Blog: Heart rate variability using the phone’s camera
4. Flatt, Andrew A., and Michael R. Esco. “Validity of the ithleteTM smart phone application for determining ultra-short-term heart rate variability.” Journal of Human Kinetics 39, no. 1 (2013): 85-92.
5. Garet, Martin, et al. “Individual interdependence between nocturnal ANS activity and performance in swimmers.” Medicine and science in sports and exercise 36 (2004): 2112-2118.
6. Pichot, Vincent, et al. “Relation between heart rate variability and training load in middle-distance runners.” Medicine and science in sports and exercise 32.10 (2000): 1729-1736.
7. Kiviniemi, Antti M., et al. “Endurance training guided individually by daily heart rate variability measurements.” European journal of applied physiology 101.6 (2007): 743-751
8. Myllymäki, Tero, et al. “Effects of exercise intensity and duration on nocturnal heart rate variability and sleep quality.” European journal of applied physiology112.3 (2012): 801-809
9. Esco, Michael R., and Andrew A. Flatt. “Ultra-short-term heart rate variability indexes at rest and post-exercise in athletes: evaluating the agreement with accepted recommendations.” Journal of sports science & medicine 13, no. 3 (2014): 535.
10. Plews, D. J., Laursen, P. B., Kilding, A. E., & Buchheit, M. (2012). Heart rate variability in elite triathletes, is variation in variability the key to effective training? A case comparison. European journal of applied physiology, 112(11), 3729-3741.
11. Stanley, Jamie, Shaun D’Auria, and Martin Buchheit. “Cardiac Parasympathetic Activity and Race Performance: An Elite Triathlete Case Study.” IJSPP 10.4 (2015).
12. Buchheit, M. (2014). Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome?. Frontiers in physiology, 5. Chicago.

By Nick Garcia

The last article I wrote focused on defining each of the cycles that relate to Dr. Bondarchuk’s system as well as defining the exercises that go into each cycle. To review we now know that the exercises are classified as such: CE = Competitive Exercise, SDE = Specific Development Exercise, SPE = Specific Preparatory Exercise and GPE = General Preparatory Exercise. Furthermore, it was said that you perform 1-SDE, 2 SPE’s, and upwards of 4 GPE’s per cycle. As for the CE’s as many as three implements can be thrown and it is important that one of those implements is the competition weight.

When looking at the exercise classifications you may think to yourself there are so many movement selections per classification, how do I go about choosing the correct ones. To start beginners off I like to base my selections on the characteristics you are trying to build that cycle. For example, if I want to have a cycle based on speed, I would throw light implements and choose exercises that have more of a speed characteristic to them. For an SDE, I may choose to use a lighter object to perform the movement with rather than a heavy object. For my SPE’s I may choose a Snatch variation instead of a Clean variation and a Speed Step Up rather than a Squat variation. For my GPE’s I will use movements that generate more speed: Transverse/Twist: Med Ball Side Throw to Wall, Back: Kb Big Swing, Frontal: Side Ups, and Sagittal: Med Ball Slams. To sum it up the cycle would look like this:

• CE: Stand Throw 16lb x4, Full Throw 16lb x8, Full Throw 6K x8
• SDE: Med Ball Shoulder Punches: 3×5@20lbs
• SPE #1: Hang Snatch: 3×5@60%
• SPE #2: Step Up: 3×5@1 rep per second
• GPE Circuit: Side Throw to Wall x10e, Kb Big Swing x8, Side Up x10e, Slams x10

If I wanted a cycle to be more strength based rather than speed, I would switch my exercise selection up to represent that characteristic. Throwing heavier implements and choosing movements that have less of a speed element to them when comparing to other movements. It could look something like this:

• CE: Stand Throw 20lb x6, Half Turn Throw 18lb x6, Full Throw 16lb x8
• SDE: 50lb Med Ball Stand Throws: 3×5@50lbs
• SPE #1: Clean from Floor: 3×5@60%
• SPE #2: Trap Bar Deadlift: 3×5@60%
• GPE Circuit: Big Circles x10e, Good Mornings x8, KB Side Bends x10e, Ab Wheel x10

It would be my objective to perform both these cycles when first starting this type of training system. This is where the data collection comes in. During each cycle I would collect data from each throwing session marking the best throws with each implement and charting them in a spreadsheet. Once you get several sessions in you will begin to see a pattern of performance. This pattern is what will eventually tell you when you are in PEAK form. Furthermore, after completing both cycles, you can compare and contrast the differences in performance and determine if your athlete gets a better transfer from a speed-based cycle or a strength-based cycle.

In my opinion, finding out how your athlete reacts to these different characteristics can be very helpful in the future. For example, I had two athletes in the same year that were on the same system. However, after a few cycles I determined through data collection that one reacted better using light implements and the other using heavier implements. This allowed me to set up their final Developmental cycle leading into the important meets based on what works best for the individual. Both had personal bests at the biggest meet. Without the data collection, this may not have turned out the way it did.

Determine how an athlete reacts to different training stimulus to plan future training sessions.
Click To Tweet

Above are examples of how much you can get out of short-term data collection. When working with athletes for several years you can gather a great deal from the data other than just athlete’s reactions based on Speed or Strength based Cycles. Since I have the most data on myself, I will use the data collection from the last four years of my training to give you a few examples of how important data collection can be. Over these past number of years, I have determined that the 6K shot has a huge positive transfer for me with the competition implement. I know this because when looking at the data many of my best competition throws have come when I have used the 6K in Developmental/Maintenance/Cleansing Cycles. I have also determined that I can throw as heavy as an 18lb and as light as the 6K from full throws without hindering my technical rhythm. Anything heavier or lighter from a full is detrimental to my performance.

Does this mean I will never throw a 5k or 20lb in a cycle from fulls? Absolutely not. I still get benefit from doing them so I just don’t throw those implements during the competition season. I have also determined what lifts carry the most positive transfer for me. These would be the Clean-Grip Snatch and Speed Step Up. I know this because of the same reason I know what implements work best for me: DATA COLLECTION!!!!

Like I mentioned above the data will tell you when you are moving into peak form. When performing the cycles correctly, it should be the same for each cycle. Therefore, you can plan your meets according to your reactions. Personally, in a Developmental Cycle I have my best throws during sessions 4-6 and hit PEAK during sessions 16-22. This is like clockwork every time. I would plan meets during these sessions cause I know I will be on point. During a rest/cleanse cycle I also have a specific pattern. My best throws take place between 3-5 sessions and 18-20 sessions. I would plan meets within these sessions. I feel it is important to mention since I am older that my best competition throws come in the Rest/Cleanse phase. I still hit PEAK form in my Developmental Cycles but that extra rest I get coming off PEAK form into Rest/Cleanse I seem to react very well. Below is an example of what a typical developmental cycle may look like in data form:

Figure 1. My weekly averages for the Development Cycle.

The way I chart my throws is on a 4 to 5-session average. So week 1 could be considered 4-5 sessions, week 2 could be considered 8-10 sessions, and so on. This all depends on how many sessions I get done in a week, As you can see, my shot marks begin to rise at the end of week 3 which would be roughly 16 sessions and begins to drop after week 5 which is roughly 22-25 sessions. What is important is that you see a distinct peak for each implement. This is what tells you that you are in PEAK form. Note: These are all practice throws. I leave competition throws out because I normally get between a meter and meter and half conversion from practice to meet situations.

Detailed Data collection like this can help you perform your best at the right time. If you have any questions, feel free to email me at nick_g_garcia@hotmail.com

Martin Bingisser and I have produced 90 minutes of video to introduce coaches to the basics of transfer of training, special strength, and periodization. This online video course is available here on the HMMR Media website.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Christopher Rowe, Vald Performance

Injuries to athletes are a common occurrence in the sporting arena. Elite athletes are expected to perform consistently at the highest level, subjecting their bodies to excessive forces, stresses and impacts, which without adequate preparation can result in frustrating mid-season breakdowns or entire seasons on the sideline.

While injuries in the elite sporting landscape are wide-ranging, it’s unlikely to surprise our readers that the occurrence, frequency and impact of hamstring strain injuries are extremely high across many sports. Hamstring strain injuries are in fact one of the most frequent non-contact injuries that occur in all high-speed running-based sports¹. The analysis of seasonal injury reports continue to confirm the high rate of hamstring strain injuries, including:

• The NFL recording 96 incidences of hamstring strain injuries in the 2014 season, placing it third behind knee and ankle injuries in the NFL²;
• The NCAA recording 1,142 reported hamstring strain injuries during the 2009/10 to 2013/14 academic years³;
• The Australian Football League 2013 injury report stated that hamstring strain injuries were the number one injury in the game in terms of both incidence and prevalence (missed games)⁴;
• The Australian Football League 2014 injury report indicating that although the overall rate of hamstring injuries at clubs had decreased it was still number one in terms of new injuries per club per season (5.2 hamstring injuries per club per year)⁵; and

The perplexing thing is, as noted recently in the British Journal of Sports Medicine⁶:

In spite of all the research and additional understanding of hamstring muscle injuries over the past 20-30 years, we have not reduced the incidence of first-time injuries, and the recurrence rate is still extremely high.

With powerful research providing a much clearer understand of why hamstring strain injuries occur, it begs the question: why does the occurrence of hamstring strain injuries remain so high? Is it that elite sporting organisations are failing to learn, innovative and challenge the status quo? Are organisations taking too much of a reactive approach to injuries and failing to implement preventative measures? Or is something else at play?

What Have We Learned?

One of the biggest learnings in recent years is the effect of eccentric hamstring strength on the occurrence of hamstring strain injuries.

Ground-breaking research on the link came from a group of sports scientists from Australia with one key goal – to discover why hamstring injuries continued to be so prevalent in one of Australia’s most popular sports – Aussie Rules Football. Aussie Rules Football involves two teams of 18 on-field players competing to score points against each other by kicking a ball through their opposing team’s posts at each end of the oval-shaped field. Athletes in the top professional league (the AFL) in Australia play for 80 minutes and commonly run more than 10 miles in each game.

With support from AFL teams desperate to reduce their hamstring strain injury rates, the scientists (primarily Dr Anthony Shield and Dr David Opar) were able to collect comprehensive data by measuring athletes’ eccentric hamstring strength during the age-old Nordic Curl exercise in the 2013 pre-season period. That data was then compared against injury data compiled throughout the 2013 season, with some very interesting results.

Those results indicated that players who finished the pre-season with relatively low eccentric hamstring strength were more likely to have a hamstring strain injury. As a statistical cut point, players with eccentric hamstring strength below 279 newtons (roughly 63lbs of force) were 4.3 times more likely to have a hamstring injury in the upcoming season than their peers above 279 newtons.

The report also demonstrated that, to a large degree, the heightened hamstring injury risk caused by age⁷ could be largely overcome by increases in eccentric strength, as demonstrated by the below chart:

Figure 1. Opar et al., MSSE. 2015 Apr;47(4):857-65.

Using eccentric hamstring strength as an example, it is clear from the above graph that although unlikely to eradicate the occurrence of hamstring strain injuries in elite sport, it is possible to mitigate the occurrence and severity of injuries by utilising tools that provide objective measurements that can translate into science-backed risk matrices.

How to Measure Hamstring Strength?

The age of objective metrics and big data has well and truly hit the industry, and while not all metrics are created equal, new technologies – and a better understanding of their applications – are providing sporting teams with more and more actionable data every day.

Armed with objective data, preparation staff can identify at-risk athletes and take steps in their program design to address identified risks for specific players (such as putting them in a dedicated pre-hab program to build strength in the affected hamstring(s)). For years, we have heard the adage that programs should be tailored to the athletes’ unique requirements, but quite often this isn’t carried through in practice. The first step, of course, is to get the objective data in the hands of preparation staff.

Typically objective data on eccentric hamstring strength was procured by (at the gold standard) subjecting athletes to a 20-minute test on an isokinetic dynamometer. Testing by this method has few supporters in the elite sporting environment given the exorbitant cost of an isokinetic dynamometer, the time cost required to test players, the highly technical nature of the device and concerns of athlete soreness at the conclusion of testing. At the other end of the scale, handheld dynamometers offered a relatively cheaper alternative, but user error accounts for considerable discrepancy in data collection.

Fortunately, the elite and sub-elite sporting industry is far from immune to the onset of innovation and digital disruption. The significant gap between the isokinetic and handheld dynamometers has been filled by the NordBord – the next generation of diagnostic technology focused on arming strength and conditioning teams with a tool that can quickly, accurately and cost-effectively provide metrics that actually matter.

The NordBord

It was from Dr Anthony Shield and Dr David Opar’s study into the AFL that identified the need for the NordBord. Clubs wouldn’t allow their players to be consumed for extended periods on an isokinetic dynamometer and data from handheld devices would be too inconsistent. Accordingly, they developed their own field-testing device.

The NordBord embodies an innovative design with simplistic elegance and has been designed with familiarity, practicality and ease of use at mind. The device is relatively simple to use – players kneel on the NordBord and perform repetitions of the Nordic Curl exercise while the NordBord calculates (amongst other things) the peak eccentric hamstring strength of each leg independently.

Figure 2. NordBord Hamstring Evaluation

In less than 2 minutes on the device (once familiarised), preparation staff will have an indication of the athlete’s eccentric hamstring strength and between-leg symmetry. Then they can determine, by reference to the risk matrixes generated by Dr. Shield and Dr. Opar’s research, which athletes fall into the at-risk category. From there, they can customise pre-season routines to improve these figures into a safer ranges. The ability to benchmark and then retest ensures that the athlete only moves onto a full load when they are ready.

The NordBord empowers strength and condition professionals with real-time, quantifiable and objective data.

It is important to note that although the NordBord provides a specific figure that can be benchmarked, each athlete’s age and hamstring injury history must also be taken into account. But while these risk factors are non-modifiable in themselves, the effect these variables have on the propensity for injury can be reduced with an increase in eccentric hamstring strength (as demonstrated in the graph above, athletes in their late twenties can reduce their injury probability to levels comparable with their 18-year-old counterparts).

Metrics and data will drive elite athlete management and elite sporting clubs that fail to innovate will fall behind. Quick and efficient access to real-time metrics is why the NordBord should form a part of any elite sporting organisation’s screening and monitoring routine.

Tom Myslinski, Head Strength and Conditioning Coach at Jacksonville Jaguars, said the NordBord has given him “the ability to identify and address those at-risk athletes” on their roster.

“Hamstring strains can keep key players out of action for weeks so being able to determine which players are at risk, and do the correct work to avoid future injury in those players, is invaluable for us,” he said.

The NordBord is not limited to eccentric hamstring strength, and can also measure an athlete’s isometric strength. While research may less support isometric strength as a predictor or injury, it is undeniably a useful and low-impact alternative. This makes it ideal for testing players who are particularly weak or fragile, such as those returning from injury. Long have handheld dynamometers been used to measure isometric strength, with extremely variable results due to operator error. The NordBord instead removes the extra human factor and provides a stable, reliable platform for measuring isometric strength.

Incremental improvements are often overlooked during the preseason, but even small improvements can have major impacts towards the end of a season. The NordBord is equipped to detect these subtle changes, allowing them to be actioned upon when players are most malleable.

“… to determine which players are at risk, and do the correct work to avoid future injury in those players, is invaluable for us.” — Tom Myslinski, Head Strength and Conditioning Coach, Jacksonville Jaguars

Ultimately, it is in the interest of high performance and conditioning staff to take these proactive steps. Even a single injury prevented can save days or weeks where their attention is pulled away from their primary function: helping athletes win.

Proactive injury management can be easy, and with the proliferation of technology in the athlete management sector and athlete data amalgamators such as Kinduct, CoachMePlus and Kitman Labs, the NordBord becomes a high-value string that can easily be added to any team’s bow. Sporting organisations who are prepared to be innovative and dynamic have the opportunity to improve incrementally and measurably over time. Metrics and big data are here to stay, and metrics that matter can go a long way to reducing the occurrence of hamstring injuries in elite athletes.

The Far-reaching Implications of Hamstring Injuries

The implications of hamstring strains are far reaching, and go beyond lost game time for injured athletes. Even the psychological effects on injured athletes cannot be overlooked, especially when recurrent injuries can often plague athletes for their entire professional careers. Even once a player has completed the often lengthy rehabilitation process, confidence to perform in a high-pressure game environment is often reduced, and even a small reduction in performance or decision-making ability can have a massive impact on the outcome of a match. Player welfare is (or at least should be) the primary concern for all elite sporting organisations, so ensuring the implementation of the latest technology, data and injury prevention methods is crucial.

If we continue to explore the fallout from injury occurrences, support staff will echo the grievances of players, with huge amounts of time and effort required to successfully rehabilitate a player for the rigours of elite sport. And with these significant investments of time, the staff’s ability to manage the rest of the team can be adversely affected. Culturally, elite athletes are often known for their egos, but also for their expectations, and organizations with high rates of injury will often find it difficult to attract and retain players, as well as support staff. And with enough injury naturally comes declines in performance. And without drawing too long a bow, eventually these cultural and performance slips can have a negative impact on the financial viability of an organisation – as can salaries paid to an injured player who sits on the bench week after week, willing but unable to contribute.

If you could accurately and cost effectively test an athlete’s hamstring strength in under two minutes, would you? Well, you should certainly consider it.

Please share so others may benefit.

Reference

1. Opar, D.A., J. Drezner, A. Shield, M. Williams, D. Webner, B. Sennett, R. Kapur, M. Cohen, J. Ulager, and A. Cafengiu, Acute Hamstring Strain Injury in Track‐and‐Field Athletes: A 3‐Year Observational Study at the Penn Relay Carnival. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 2014. 24(4): p. e254-e259; Ekstrand, J., M. Hägglund, and M. Waldén, Injury Incidence and Injury Patterns in Professional Football: The Uefa Injury Study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2011. 45(7): p. 553-558; Elliott, M.C., B. Zarins, J.W. Powell, and C.D. Kenyon, Hamstring Muscle Strains in Professional Football Players a 10-Year Review. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 2011. 39(4): p. 843-850.
2. NFL Player Injuries
3. Epidemiology of Hamstring Strains in 25 NCAA Sports in the 2009-2010 to 2013-2014 Academic Years, Sara L. Dalton, Zachery Y. Kerr and Thomas P. Dompier. Am J Sports Med
4. Australian Football League Injury Report 2013
5. 2014 AFL Injury Report
6. Hamstring Injuries: Prevention and Treatment
7. Arnason A, Sigurdsson SB, Gudmundsson A, et al. Risk factors for injuries in football. Am J Sports Med. 2004; 32 (1 Suppl.) 5S-16S.

By Dan Fichter

We largely owe our knowledge of reflexes to Sir Charles Sherrington, who has become known as the “Father of the Nervous System.” His book, The Integrative Action of the Nervous System, circa 1901 was one of the first books written on the nervous system and our reflexes.

Our nervous system is a crazy, beautiful, array of neural chemical circuits. Two primal reflexes that have the greatest potential for problems relating to pain and human locomotion are the startle reflex and withdrawal reflex. A third, the protective joint reflex, is constantly influencing our attempts to relax muscles and increase ROM, which in turns allows us to move more freely. Do we ever try to address these fundamental human intricacies in our training programs?

What about the simple cross crawl concept we learn as babies. As we grow, we develop flawed movement, injuries, and reactions to stress; and lose our ability to move the way we were designed to move. I encourage traveling back to the basics and watch your athleticism increase before your eyes.

If we travel back to the basics and make sure we are in a relaxed state before we try to displace ourselves I think we will have a better output when moving explosively. Let me give you some basics. To understand the breadth and depth of the impact that reflex-driven training can have, let’s revisit the basics.

1. Muscle strength and length is adequate
2. Joints glide with a coefficient of friction similar to ice on ice
3. Autonomic nervous system is in an anabolic state with parasympathetic influence
4. Fascia moves normally

When these things are in place (addressed in warm up) the neuromuscular system is permitted to explode.

Let’s go back to even more basic equations of human movement. In order to move we need to relax and contract our muscular system in a specific order, time, and percentage of max to get the desired movement and outcome. For speed production, we have to relax antagonistic muscles to the same extent the agonist muscles drive us. In strength activities, we still have to do this with a little co-contraction to stabilize but nonetheless still have to relax in a certain order and time to facilitate the proper movement. Sounds pretty simple but do we train this and put our body in the correct position to be able to display this?

Think about this. When stress hits or you get upset, shoulders raise and neck muscles turn on to prevent the head from moving. Looks like a pattern when some people run. Hmm. When shoulders shrug, hips lock (something I learned from Charlie Francis). These are stress responses that become learned. I believe we can fix these responses or at least delay them to increase performance. Remember, in the sporting world, a little change can have a huge impact on performance.

In the sporting world, a little change can have a huge impact on performance.
Click To Tweet

Each day I go to work I get to talk shop with some great Docs (Function Neurology Chiropractors) that understand the concepts of Neurology and how it is linked to great movement.

“Genuine speed and strength are valued attributes that become compromised when the brain prioritizes protection over performance. Returning the patient to a state where they can access the full capacity of the motor cortex for high-performing, uncompensated muscular movement should be the clinical goal.” – C. Robert Luckey

Working in conjunction with this type of therapy puts every athlete in a great position to get better!!!

At the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium, I will discuss the way we train the reflex system in our training, our warm up, and our therapy. Adding these simple steps to any program can help any athlete move more freely and delay the onset of fatigue.

In addition to training the reflex system, I will make a presentation on Douglas Heel’s “Be-Activated”.

A friend in France introduced me to South Africa’s Douglas Heel. I traveled to London in 2010 to learn from him after reading about him. What a great experience. Douglas made me feel welcome and was intrigued why I would travel so far just to see him.

When I returned from London, I brought Douglas Heel to New York. I introduced Douglas to our Docs at my gym/clinic. He taught us so much and was so interesting. I also introduced him to Chris Korfist. The rest is history I guess.

I’m glad Doug has been able to help people here in the states and share his belief system. It’s very powerful stuff. I use something of his every day! I owe a lot to him for influencing the direction of my research. Chris has been a long-time friend and great business partner. We met years ago and have stayed close. Chris shares the same passion for getting people faster, but more importantly he has been a true friend who’s helped me in so many different areas.

Dan Fichter will make three presentations at the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium.

Purchase tickets here.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Tony Holler

Football games have become track meets held in the fall. Have you seen the pads football players wear today? Football players wear compression shorts, tight jerseys, thin shoulder pads, and a weapon called a helmet. Football has become a game of sprinting, jumping, and explosion. Even the pachyderms of the offensive line get drafted based on their 40-times. Six of the NFL Combine’s ten fastest offensive tackles were picked in Round-1 and Round-2 of the 2015 Draft.

Track is the sister sport of football. 78% of track events (14 of 18) feature sprinting, jumping, and explosion.

Football is played in the fall. Track takes place in the spring. Training for one is training for the other. Football needs to infiltrate track. Track needs to infiltrate football.

Football games have become track meets held in the fall. - Tony Holler
Click To Tweet

The Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium will address the challenges and methodology of training football and track athletes. The consortium will offer track-specific and football-specific breakout sessions. As a bonus, coaches can attend up to four sessions on “Be-Activated”.

To keep this article at a reasonable size, Chris Korfist and I have decided to split our promotion article into two segments. I will write about my guys, Chris will write about his guys (Cal Dietz, Joel Smith, Dan Fichter, and Dan Hartman).

Speaker Bios (The Holler-Guys)

Latif Thomas poses with Olympic Gold Medalist Usain Bolt

Latif Thomas is my favorite track clinician. He is edgy, funny, and thought-provoking. The other day I asked Latif what percentage of cross-country coaches understood sprint training. His reply, “1% and that’s probably being generous. Maybe it should be 1% with an asterisk, like Bobby Jindal’s poll numbers.” Just for fun, I asked him what percentage of football coaches understood sprint training. His answer, “8% with much higher numbers in some areas.”

Latif Thomas is the CEO of Complete Track and Field. CTF markets track & field information to high school track coaches. Boo Schexnayder is a regular. Latif calls Boo a friend and mentor. Last summer’s CTF Track Clinic held at Harvard sold out with over 400 athletes from around the world attending.

Latif Thomas works with Toney Veney, Marc Mangiacotti, Scott Christensen, and many others.

Latif has over 9000 Facebook followers and over 3000 Twitter followers.

In 2012, I attended the WISTCA Clinic in Milwaukee. Latif spoke five times, five different presentations. I’ve never learned as much from one guy, ever. Latif presented his material and owned the room. I sat in the front row at every session. On December 11-12, Latif will present material that has never appeared in video, print, or interviews.

Lou Sponsel

Lou Sponsel played football at Northern Illinois University. Lou is the head football coach at Palatine Fremd H.S. in the Chicago area. In addition, Lou Sponsel serves as sprint coach for the Palatine Fremd track team.

I did a mini-clinic on speed training for Lou and six other coaches from Palatine Fremd 7 years ago. Lou adopted many of my ideas. In addition, I encouraged Lou to visit the best sprint coach I know, Chris Korfist. The rest is history. Lou’s football team has made the playoffs every year since he’s been the head coach (four years). Last year, Lou Sponsel’s sprint relays ran 42.41, 1:27.48, and 3:19.91, two of which were school records. In regards to the outbreak of entrepreneurial money-grabbing 7-7 football, Lou tells his athletes, “You are wasting your time.”

18 months ago I wrote my first article for Freelap USA, Sprint-Based Football, featuring Palatine Fremd.

Four football teams in Illinois are committed to “Be-Activated”. Two may be state champions this year. At Fremd, athletes activate each other six-days per week. Lou Sponsel’s athletes activate their diaphragm, psoas, and glutes. On Thursdays, Dr. Nate Porcher oversees a 50-minute activation session. Fremd’s varsity football team suffered only one concussion in nine games this year. Last year, Nazareth Academy had one concussion in 14 games on their way to the 6A State Championship.

Chad Lakatos and Alec Holler

I group these two guys together for a reason. Both coach football and track at Edwardsville High School. These two guys have been a team for the last five years. Edwardsville has placed 3rd, 2nd, 8th, 2nd, and 1st in the Illinois 3A (big-school) state meet in the Holler-Lakatos years. Edwardsville has gone 45-5 in the past four years in football. Four track coaches are on the football staff; four football coaches are on the track staff. These four coaches include the head track coach and head football coach. This year, a fifth football coach will join Edwardsville’s track staff.

Chad Lakatos is like a son to me. Chad quarterbacked my freshmen football team in 1988 to a 9-0 record. In 1991, Chad was an All-State track athlete leading my track team to a 3rd place finish at the state meet.

Alec Holler is my son. Alec caught 17 touchdown passes to lead my sophomore football team in 2002 to a 9-0 record. In 2004, Alec was an All-State track athlete leading my track team to a 3rd place finish at the state meet.

Only 41 years old, Chad Lakatos is headed to the Mt. Rushmore of Illinois Track & Field. Chad is the only coach in IHSA to win two state championships in Class A and another in Class 3A. Chad’s coaching expertise extends to football where his Edwardsville freshman teams have won 80% of their games, a record of 36-9.

At the age of 29, Alec Holler has struck gold as a hurdle coach. How many high school hurdle coaches have produced these marks in the past two seasons?

• Craig James 14.07 & 38.10 (2014, senior season)
• Isaiah Michl 14.54 & 37.13 (2015, senior season)
• Travis Anderson 13.98 & 38.20 (2015, sophomore season)

Alec Holler’s football assignment: the defensive backfield. Interception records have been set in both the last two seasons. Edwardsville’s quarterbacks have thrown only ten interceptions while Alec’s defensive backs have picked off 31.
No one does the track-football thing better than Edwardsville High School.

Below is the poster-child (man-child) of Edwardsville H.S. A.J. Epenesa is only a junior. Last year as a sophomore, A.J. Epenesa was the leading scorer and rebounder for Edwardsville’s varsity basketball team. In the spring, he placed 2nd in the discus at the IHSA state meet. Epenesa is ranked as the #2 overall football player in the nation for the class of 2017. His best discus throw of 194’3” makes him the #1 sophomore thrower in the U.S. Many schools have elite athletes; few promote the idea of playing multiple sports.

Edwardsville Football and Basketball

High school thrower.

The pictures above speak volumes. All coaches should appreciate the beauty of an athlete competing in more than one sport. I give so much credit to my friend, Matt Martin, the head football coach at Edwardsville. Unlike the more selfish football-centric coaches in his profession, Matt encourages competition. Anyone who doesn’t see the educational value of playing multiple sports should stop calling themselves educators.

Tony Holler

I started as a basketball coach and became the youngest head basketball coach in Illinois back in 1983. I accepted the head track job at Harrisburg in 1990 and one month later got fired as head basketball coach in a midnight coup d’état. I’ve never looked back.

My obsession with basketball was rerouted to football and track. My freshmen and sophomore football teams have won 82% of their games in 21 seasons at three different schools in two states. My freshmen at Plainfield North have won their last 39 games. As a track coach, my teams have won 8 state trophies including three state championships.

In my opinion, high school coaching is the most rewarding level of coaching. Instead of recruiting or drafting elite athletes, high school coaches work with what they have … the talented AND the untalented. Instead of spending their days evaluating talent, high school coaches teach all day, and then develop talent.

I’ve presented at over 20 clinics and have been published over 50 times. I may be in the twilight of my coaching career, but I still have gas left in my tank. Strangely, after 35 years, I have more enthusiasm than I had at age 22.

My dream for this clinic is to provide an experience where a football coach and track coach can share a weekend, improving both of their programs. Our schedule allows a football coach to avoid track-specific sessions and a track coach to avoid football-specific sessions. The Saturday morning demonstrations will be worth the price of admission.

Plainfield North sprinter DeVaughn Hrobowski is testing Chris Korfist’s mind-blowing 1080 Sprint.

As a bonus, “Be-Activated”, will be presented in four separate sessions. “Be-Activated” is a performance-enhancing manual therapy program from South Africa. Coaches will learn enough to take Activation home with them. Douglas Heel is not scheduled to return to the United States anytime soon, so your best chance of learning “Be-Activated” is through Douglas Heel’s surrogates.

The famous basement of Chris Korfist. Here, Chris Korfist is activating my 4×1 anchor, Tommy Harris, the night before our conference track meet. At the time, Harris had hamstring tightness and discomfort. I had made the decision to scratch him from the conference track meet. After activation, Tommy was a new man. Tommy Harris ran four great races the next day.

Stay alert for upcoming articles in association with the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium.

For more information, email, call, text Tony Holler, 630-849-8294.

If you need more convincing …

Top Ten Reasons Why Football Coaches Need to Attend Our “Track-Football Activation Consortium”

All stats compiled by my friends at TrackingFootball

Over the past three NFL Drafts, 2013-2015, 766 players have been drafted and approximately 441 (58%) of those participated in high school track and field.

In 2014, approximately 3,040 high school football players received Division I-FBS scholarships and approximately 1,731 (57%) participated in high school track and field.

Over the past three NFL Drafts, 96 players have been drafted in the 1st round. 59 of the 96 (61%) first round picks participated in high school track and field.

The 2015 NFL Draft included some top-flight shot putters.

The 2015 NFL Draft had some track speed.

The best NCAA running backs have track speed.

If you play big-time college football as a running back, defensive back, or receiver, you probably didn’t boycott high school track.

Lots of Heisman Trophy winners were track athletes.

Explosive track athletes become explosive football players.

Receivers make great track athletes and vice versa.

Thanks again to Mark at TrackingFootball.

To see the time schedule for the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium, click here.

To purchase a ticket for the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium, click here.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Jason S Davis, BSc. M.Chiro

When discussing hamstring injuries, attention is often focused on the management and rehabilitation of acute injuries such as grade one biceps femoris tear. However, many times hamstring soreness and poor sprint performance resulting from hamstring problems can persist long after an initial acute injury or multiple acute tears. In some cases, soreness develops even without an initial tear taking place. Most coaches and athletes are aware that the hamstrings are under tremendous forces during sprinting.

The forces appear highest during the terminal recovery phase of the foot just prior to ground contact, as well as during the support phase working to create stiffness in conjunction with the quadriceps and gluteal muscles. This occurs in around 0.03 seconds in elite sprinters, meaning the rate of forces is tremendous. The literature would suggest that overly ambitious and unmanaged training and competition volumes are the major culprits for the development of hamstring injuries. Chronic pain is handled extremely badly with athletes, often because the wrong things are blamed for the problem, and the wrong recommendations are perpetuated because coaches and athletes think they can fix the problem the same way you manage an acute injury. As we will see this is not the case.

With chronic hamstring soreness, athletes tend to complain more of stiffness and soreness that persists long after exercise and is especially prevalent when warming up. They note that the pain often goes away after warming up and can often compete or train well, but the soreness gets worse the following few days. This process continues for a while until it suddenly seems to get worse and more persistent. This also tends to lead them towards more massage therapy and more stretching. Unfortunately, if these measures are aimed at the wrong things, such as attempts to break up scar tissue, adhesions, or trigger points they may perpetuate the issue, increasing anxiety and frustration.

This article will discuss the causes and implications of chronic hamstring soreness and dysfunction and what the best management approach would be.

What Causes Chronic Hamstring Soreness and Weakness?

It seems that following a hamstring injury, the nervous system sets in place inhibitory mechanisms to avoid injury again, literally turning the contractile power down. This neural inhibition can often persist long after the structural integrity has returned. The brain is likely not to allow all the powerful, fast-twitch motor units to fire when the same discipline that caused the injury is implemented again. Unfortunately, due to the rate that high muscle forces occur at during fast running, the nervous system’s protective role can remain persistent for some time specifically in relation to that activity. If fast running is forced during this period, the forces experienced are likely to be absorbed less by the contractile muscular structures and more from the passive connective tissues in the muscle and tendon. Commonly, this leads to chronic tendon soreness, further inhibition and lack of speed that can occur long after a muscular injury. Athletes and coaches underestimate how long this process may persist for, and commonly with complete rest the problem resurfaces quickly because of general relative deconditioning.

The brain responds to unmanaged or unrelenting tissue stress in an interesting way. The central nervous system and brain receive information back from the tissues via receptors that travel up through tracts in the spinal cord. The brain takes this information and together with previous experience as well as the athlete’s beliefs about the meaning of them, determines the significance of that information. Brain outputs such as pain and excessive muscle tightness are determined by how the brain responds in light of this information. However, in the case where pain and connective tissue strain has been exacerbated for some time, the brain begins to output pain messages much more readily. This is known as central sensitization that, in essence, is a lowering of the threshold to which a stimulus in the tissue receptors triggers a pain response. This is a very important point. Pain is not experienced in the tissues; it is experienced in the brain over the area that maps that region of the body (it’s much more complex than that but for the purpose of this article it will do).

Interestingly, the experience of tightness and stiffness can also be considered expressions of the brain. My experience working closely with patients in a clinical setting has made clear over time that a person’s complaint of stiffness and tightness has little to do with the actual flexibility that they possess. I was shocked when examining a top soccer player from Nigeria once when looking at his limited hamstring flexibility. When I asked him “does that feel stiff or tight?” he experienced no stiffness or tightness at all which made me question the assumption of tightness and flexibility, and what is considered normal. I concluded that his degree of flexibility was normal for him, and importantly his brain also told him that it was normal. Indeed, he did not have a hamstring problem, and he was very fast. On the other end of the spectrum, I have had examined experienced yoga attendees who complain of tightness in a hamstring with 120 degrees of range. Tightness is a perception brought on by particular sensations towards a muscles end range.

Chronic hamstring problems can build slowly over the length of a competitive season; however, very often in the initial stages they do not cause a significant decrease in performance. Commonly, a young athlete will have a breakthrough year and compete week in week out from indoor to outdoor ignoring the increasing hamstring soreness because they are still improving. They figure that with a few weeks of rest at the end of the season it should go away, only to find that when they return to training it is worse than when the season finished. Why would this be so? It seems likely that following a period of rest the general strength of the muscles may be reduced, the muscles feel well rested and relaxed but the brain has become more vigilant and remembers the stress it experienced. The brain also senses that things, in general, are a bit weaker in combination and with a state of low training arousal the brain will take precedence over the need to avoid the activity you are forcing it to do in favour of more recovery. However, it is likely that the tissue injury has healed well.

The Frustration Begins

Commonly, the athlete will seek out an answer for the soreness and see a sports professional. Often, MRI or ultrasound examination will show no abnormalities such as inflammation or distinct tears; however, it can be important to rule out. Clinical examination will demonstrate normal flexibility, strength testing in a clinical setting will appear normal, and the muscle feels no different to palpation in comparison to the other opposite muscle. At this point, many therapists will attempt to give the athlete a structural reason to rationalize some therapy. These may or may not be relevant, but, unfortunately, the relevance can be overstated, and a lot of false positives can be blamed which can build on the athlete’s anxieties if not put into perspective. Common diagnoses for chronic hamstring soreness includes tendinitis/tendinopathy, grade one tear, sciatica, and piriformis syndrome. With common treatment aimed at soft tissue joint manipulation, stretching and strengthening which if not utilized appropriately can perpetuate the belief that a structural problem is predominant and ignore a higher brain involvement.

Management

To overcome chronic soreness in hamstring muscles, the athlete needs reassurance that there is not a structural tissue problem, or it is at least minimal. If this is not managed well, this can lead to disability reinforcement. If the athlete can understand early on that their brain might be playing a role in their sensations, it can give them a sense of power over it. This is vital, it tells them there is a problem, and it is real, but it is not because they have a structural muscle problem. I often tell patients that your brain will do what it wants to do, but your thoughts and perceptions about the sensations can either make it better quicker or make it worse. Encouraging positive reinforcement, building confidence, and time are important factors that will help remarkably. This may require more time with the athlete talking about their feelings, taking every opportunity to reassure. Secondly it may require a break from normal training on track and avoiding speed endurance work for a focus on slower resistance training.

Mistakes in the management of chronic pain can be summed up in one sentence; excessive treatment and attention to the problem area without enough consideration of an overall approach can lead to disability reinforcement. I suggest that in most cases taking a more general or global approach to chronic injury management and therapy, as well as appropriate counselling that includes reassurance to rebuild confidence will be more effective.

I will outline what I think can perpetuate the problem with different treatment modalities, as well as rehabilitation attempts and suggest a better overall management approach.

Joint and Muscle Therapy

Manipulation of the soft tissues and articular structures can play a role in hamstring injury management. Unfortunately, this can be overdone and can lead to disability reinforcement often through confirmation bias. For example, athletes and coaches will seek out therapy and certain therapists with the impression that they need excessive treatment for muscular adhesions, scar tissue, poor flexibility, joint misalignment, poor core strength and a huge array of other things that may only be a fraction of the problem. Low down on the list is how the brain might be affecting the dysfunction and that their thoughts and beliefs may be reinforcing the problem. Many therapists do their job well by fixing these subtle problems; however, they fail to counsel the athlete well enough by placing these problems into perspective.

As a Chiropractor, I often consult athletes with chronic hamstring injuries/pain, and they come on the referral of their coach who tells them maybe you should go to the Chiropractor because I think your back is causing the problem. When I examine them, they often are suffering from some lower back/pelvic strain/dysfunction. However, it is often clear that these issues are likely another product of an excessive volume of training/competition and protective brain output. In essence, they often accompany a hamstring strain rather than directly cause it. Asymmetry of mobility in the sacroiliac joints has been associated with acute and chronic hamstring strains and a look at the training regime highlights two things when we find this pattern. The proportion of block starts and high-intensity bend running is too high, so I would advise that these two factors be limited in volume, especially early in the season. However, before considering joint and muscle therapy, I make sure the athlete and coach understand that this may only be a very small part of the problem and that it is likely an associated factor that is being caused by protective brain output, and not the entire cause of the hamstring injury.

Manual therapies can a have a great effect on chronic pain when the athlete is treated in a more general way. Massage and joint manipulation can stimulate pressure and movement receptors which can have the effect of altering pain processing in the brain over time. If, however, treatment is directed too much at the region of the injury, eventually we may begin to add to the sensitization. People are often confused as to why I would treat the upper back, neck or ankle with a hamstring problem; the goal is the effect on the brain and spinal cords pain processing pathways via leveraged movement stimuli. We are trying to alter wiring through very novel stimulus. I believe massage can work in a similar way as long as attention is not excessively given to a problem area and I would limit attempts to repeatedly “break up scar tissue in the muscle”. Stretching the hamstring statically or dynamically is also unlikely to have any beneficial effect on an athlete’s chronic hamstring soreness and may even perpetuate the problem as end-range stimulus is often associated with a reciprocal protective response. The muscle feels looser for about 10 minutes but subsequently it tightens up again. In addition, stretching can then become an obsessive habitual desire and continues a low-grade stimulus that triggers the brain’s protective reflexes.

Workouts to Enhance Recovery

Performing low-intensity workouts between high-intensity speed training or competition such as tempo may seem like a good idea on the surface. However, I would question the rationale behind this approach, especially with an athlete suffering chronic pain. Firstly, the intensity is relative to the degree of effort, so a workout of 10 x 100m at 75% of top speed may feel like a low-intensity session one week, but performed following a high-intensity session can become moderate to high intensity regarding effort that is the real measure of intensity. For an athlete with chronic pain, rather than providing recovery these sessions gradually create more irritation as well as slowing the rate of neuromuscular output. I would recommend that for an athlete with chronic soreness, that more days of complete rest be implemented and resist the temptation for too much active recovery. The risk of too much low intensity is that the overall ability to produce high intensity may become reduced. The rationale behind recovery sessions and tempo are that it will increase blood flow to the area and provide a gentle stimulus to the muscles to stimulate recovery and beneficial cardiovascular changes to provide better recovery systems over time, more so than high-intensity sprint training and competition can. However, there is no strong evidence that recovery can be improved this way (other than restricting intensity) or that long term adaptations will occur to enhance recovery systems. I would suggest that the main effect on some athletes may be psychological.

Strength Protocols That Excessively Focus on Strengthening the Problem Area but Fail to Create General High-intensity Muscle Effort

The longer that an athlete has suffered chronic hamstring pain and stiffness the more likely they have lost the ability to absorb load through the muscle, and they tend to remain in a shortened position to protect them. The research literature regarding hamstring injuries often focuses on which exercises activate the hamstrings the most. The argument being that high EMG activity must mean that it is a better choice to strengthen the muscle, and this will rebuild structural integrity as well as high neuromuscular output. Coaches and athletes, however, must be careful how quickly and how much volume of direct and isolated hamstring training they implement, as this plus track work may serve to overload the hamstring (and the brains response) even more. The idea of the “weak link” is an attractive one, and this type of thinking often leads to excessively working the area rather than giving it a rest and considering an overall strength approach. Indeed, the injured muscle may be a compensation for weakness in other areas, and there is a tendency over time for the athlete to develop overall lower body weakness if attention is focused on only isolated areas rather than the whole muscular chain. Certainly the hamstring to quadriceps strength ratio may be less important than once thought. Instead, one should consider strength in all muscles. Exercises that are often prescribed by health professionals tend to be generic low-intensity movements that aim to work the hamstrings in multiple ranges. The frequency of recommendation is also often far too high for daily exercise programs common that may reinforce a disability complex and simply overwork the muscle in a less than biomechanically sound fashion.

Hence with chronic hamstring injury I would suggest compound exercises can be a better initial option that involves the hamstrings as part of a team rather than in isolation. High neuromuscular output and recruitment of fast twitch motor units is accomplished well through key compound exercises such as the squat and deadlift. These exercises work the muscles and the hamstrings in their strong ranges and avoid forced or vulnerable end-range movements and forced positions in active or passive insufficiency. A lying leg curl, for instance, often places the biceps femoris in a position of active insufficiency and then it gets forced further into active insufficiency and tends to overwork the medial hamstrings, as a result, which potentiates a groin strain. The Glute-ham raise and Nordic hamstring exercise may also be limited in these regards, and I would suggest that the best and healthiest hamstring exercises produce high tension when the hip is not maintained in an extended position. Better options to isolate the hamstrings would be the Romanian or stiff leg deadlift, with both double or single leg, glute ham raise or even a seated leg curl.

Eccentric exercises have been suggested as a good means of chronic muscular and tendon pain management and have demonstrated good results in subjective pain improvements, objective intramuscular and tendon changes as well as greater strength output. However, it is not clear that omitting the concentric portion of the exercises is necessary for optimal results. I would suggest that with some exercises, avoiding forced contractions in a shortened muscle position may be the added benefit of eccentric only protocols. There is also suggestion that long-term exposure to eccentric exercise will increase fascicle length and possibly provide an advantages length-tension relationship for greater power generation in sports. This is interesting and needs more research to examine whether this can be transferred over to sporting disciplines or it is a temporary and exercise specific change.

What is clear, however, is that higher motor unit recruitment is beneficial in most cases of rehabilitation. And when it comes to sprinting, the central nervous system will only ALLOW fast sprinting to occur if it has confidence that the muscular tensile capability is very high. It would make sense that developing maximum strength capacity would be very beneficial in the whole system. The squat and deadlift, while being valuable overall leg strength developers, can also build athlete confidence as well as alter the focus away from an injury that may be valuable in the athlete that has chronic soreness. The rate of muscle tension is a lot slower than that of sprinting, so it is likely not to irritate the muscle and tendons as much. It is important, however, that the goal doesn’t become to see how much the athlete can lift, and they will need to be reduced or eliminated before speed work and competition, as a chronic hamstring problem will be much more susceptible when being forced to perform vastly different disciplines. Importantly the squat or deadlift should be taken to the point of momentary muscle failure (as long as the technique is sound) once per week to ensure fast twitch muscle fibre involvement. Staying away from running may allow the nervous system to re-learn what the muscles are capable of and change the wiring.

Hence, for an athlete coming back from a chronic hamstring problem, I would recommend a break from all running and prior to the start of competition for a 6 to 8 week period of strength training, two to three days per week, alternating between low bar squats to parallel and the conventional deadlift setting the bar down between reps. This will build general core and lower body strength output and should over some weeks let some chronic hamstring pain and stiffness reduce. After about four weeks, they should be able to challenge the hamstrings more directly by loading with the semi-stiff leg deadlift in either double leg with a wider stance that tends to target the medial hamstrings more, or in a single leg stance that appears to target the biceps femoris to a greater extent. However, I would still be mindful of the frequency of these exercises as well as the loads used. Indeed, it may be better to use them as a good gauge of strength rather than a regular exercise. The Nordic hamstring exercise may also be a good gauge of progress. Importantly are the principles of progressive overload and recovery, if the athlete can see they are getting stronger in a few key exercises confidence will soar. In cases of long-term chronic hamstring problems, the athlete may not be strong enough for the semi-stiff leg deadlift initially, and even very moderate weights can be quite aggravating and perpetuate the soreness if not careful, especially if the end-range position is not controlled well, and the passive structures of the tendon and muscle are loaded too rapidly. I would make sure that the athlete can do continuous tension normal style deadlifts (reps without putting the bar down in between) before attempting a stiff leg deadlift in the same fashion.

Speed work and Competition

It would be prudent for the athlete to build gradually up to speed work but being mindful not to make the error to push for endurance. Keeping volume relatively low with easy not forced repetitions of a distance that allows a comfortable rhythm, and encourages the athlete to ease into it. Staying away from the excitement of the track and finding a long straight and flat running strip of 200-400m would be ideal, always finishing on a faster run and avoiding the build up of fatigue. It is alluring to push into fatigue and think that the athlete will adapt, but the goal is not fitness but smooth, relaxed running that will allow a smooth transition back to top speed.

Once they are ready to get back on track and work on speed in spikes, it would be beneficial for the athlete to aim to stay fresh and maintain short high-intensity sessions, and being careful to avoid too much bend work, speed endurance and block work. Keeping the athlete’s top speed ability over a short range high will be somewhat protective over the injury. Leaving speed endurance efforts to competition would be a good strategy due to the high states of psychological arousal as it will stimulate high-quality movement, tune the nervous system and build confidence. However, they should avoid the desire to get in lots of speed work before or between competitions as they might find that they will break down fast. The athlete needs time at high intensity without exacerbation. This means high quality with long recoveries in between. If the athlete does not have access to high-quality competition a timing system such as Freelap is very valuable in keeping them from doing too much and working on mechanics at top speed, however, be mindful not to strain more and more for better times, especially no more than once per week.

Conclusion

Chronic hamstring soreness is common in sprinters and the approach to the injury must be different to that of acute tears. Their origins lie in prolonged high intensity over a period of time and are perpetuated by altered brain output. Many measures aimed at the injury often continue to aggravate the injury and over time this becomes manifested as reduced neuromuscular output. The athlete’s coaches and therapists have a crucial role in counselling the athlete in the complexity of these problems and a collaborative approach with communication can be essential. While passive manual therapy can be useful, the keys to rehab training are building strength capacity in the entire muscular system and a gradual, graded return to fast running. With the correct approach outlined in this article, over time these chronic problems will disappear; with the wrong approach promising careers can be finished.

Reference

“A Comparison of muscular activation during the back squat and deadlift to the counter movement jump,” David Robbins CSCS, NASM-CPT, Sacred Heart University.

“Developments in the Use of the Hamstring/Quadriceps Ratio for the Assessment of Muscle Balance,” Rosalind Coombs, Gerard Garbutt, J Sports Sci Med. 2002 Sep; 1(3): 56–62.
Published online 2002 Sep 1.

“Electromyographic Activity of Lower Body Muscles during the Deadlift and Still-Legged Deadlift,” Ewertton Bezerra, Roberto Simão, Steven J Fleck, Gabriel Paz, Marianna Maia , Pablo B. Costa, Journal of Exercise Physiology Online 06/2013; 16(1097-9751):30-39.

“Hamstring muscle strain treated by mobilizing the sacroiliac joint,” Michael T Cibulka, S J Rose, A Delitto, David R Sinacore, Physical Therapy (Impact Factor: 2.53). 09/1986; 66(8):1220-3.

“Successful management of hamstring injuries in Australian Rules footballers: two case reports,” Wayne T Hoskins and Henry P Pollard, Chiropr Osteopat. 2005; 13: 4.

“The accuracy of MRI in predicting recovery and recurrence of acute grade one hamstring muscle strains within the same season in Australian Rules football players.” Gibbs NJ1, Cross TM, Cameron M, Houang MT., J Sci Med Sport. 2004 Jun;7(2):248-58.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Joel Smith

Editor’s note: Joel will be a featured speaker at the 2015 Track-Football Activation Consortium.

Plyometrics are only truly useful if there is a specific intent behind them. They aren’t a magic pill. They must provide an overload in at least one of the following areas to provide a real athletic benefit:

• Muscle recruitment
• Speed of recruitment
• Muscle coordination
• Ground reaction force

Doing plyometrics for the sake of their fancy name or promised benefits won’t lead you down the path to athletic excellence.

There is an inherent joy in leaving the pull of the earth’s gravity. In reading through Joe Navarro’s The Power of Body Language, it became clear to me that acting against gravity is a bodily sign of pure joy. What is in the mind is in the body. Jumping is a universal sign of happiness and excitement.

Jump training has been a huge part of my life, and they joy of getting just a little farther off the ground than the last week, month, or year has been a driver in my search for training methods and philosophies surrounding this human movement.

For this article (series), I am whittling much of those ideas down into three primary forms of effective plyometric exercise to help usher one’s jumping ability to its fullest potential. We’ll start with the usual method informed coaches and athletes turn to for building vertical jump ability (if they are physically ready for it), shock plyometrics, and then get into two less considered, yet vital, training ideals for building more vertical and reactive power, variable and “pliosoidal” jump training, and also that of contrast/cluster work.

Jumping is a universal sign of happiness and excitement.
Click To Tweet

I wrote his article with the track and field coach and athlete in mind, but the following workouts can apply to any athlete interested in jumping higher and becoming more explosive. These methods are also covered and arranged in detail in my latest book Vertical Ignition.

High Powered Shock Plyometrics

If you want to jump high, then you need to train the jump pathway at a more intense level than you ever have before.

The number one priority of jump training is for the athlete to learn to produce more force in less time, and put that force in the right place. Nothing is better suited to this task than a proper selection of intense sprints and plyometric exercises. Since sprinting is another topic, we’ll just stick to plyometrics for the sake of this article.

Before plyometrics were given their “American” name, they had a far more fearsome and intimidating label: “shock training”. I doubt the term “plyometric” was being thrown around shortly after the Soviets tricked the Americans by telling them that an 8-9 foot box was the optimal height in which to drop from in the depth jump exercise.

Shock training was (and still is) a series of landing and jumping exercises based on the depth jump. Jumping itself is a volatile, violent event, where an athlete must handle multiple times their bodyweight in an instant. Jumping, like sprinting is a hindbrain activity, where reflex action is key.

Plyometrics designed to overload the jumping process should, therefore, yield even greater forces, or rates of loading than jumping, and do so in a precision manner that allows force to be properly channeled for the ultimate leap. As far as improving vertical jump is concerned, plyometrics that teach athletes to utilize maximal forces in the vertical and horizontal vectors reflexively are paramount.

Granted, not everyone can just set out and start banging out depth jumps from a 48” box, or performing a standing triple jump from a 24” elevated start position. Shock plyometrics are best used once an athlete has reached physical maturity, has good training experience, and more importantly, good proficiency, in lower level plyometric takeoffs and landings. As I see it, there are two basic types of shock plyometrics that can be used in the training of track and field jumpers, and other aspiring vertical jump athletes:

• Depth jumping and related activities
• Triple jump family bounding

Depth Jump Family

When it comes to jumping higher, coaches and athletes should have a close relationship with the depth jump. 2.40m high jumper Rudolf Povarnitsyn did.

Regarding the basic depth jump, the exercise is easily modulated towards the ability level of the athlete. An 18” depth jump is as different from a 48” depth jump as a 135lb squat is from a 405lb squat, and you don’t hear many in-the-trenches strength coaches going around telling half of their athletes to avoid barbell squatting.

The use of low boxes in depth jumping is one of the best ways to teach younger athletes, who are ready to train more seriously (late middle school, early high school), landing mechanics in a “single response” format. On the level of higher boxes, depth jumps are directly scalable to the landing and reactive ability of the athlete as they progress through their athletic career.

Learning to perform a depth jump in a single response format is the base work for many other plyometric exercises. As legendary strength coaches, such as Dan John, have said: learn the proper position first, then do it in volume, and finally, start increasing the load. Low intensity, repetitive plyometrics are a useful tool for younger and less experienced athletes, but if the first rep isn’t correct, the middle and last ones generally won’t be either. Starting with the single response is the ground work for success of multiple repetitions.

Depth Jump Family: Single Leg Versions

An advanced version of the depth jump that is particularly useful for all athletes, and not just the track and field variety, is the single leg depth jump. Interestingly enough, the single leg depth jump has much more in common with the two leg jump than it does a single leg takeoff. Why? Contact time.

Single leg depth jumps tend to yield a relatively long contact time compared to its two leg counterparts (although this time can be lowered considerably when rebounding over a hurdle). Since this is the case, the single leg depth jump is more closely related to the “explode” quality of a vertical jump than the driving, “reactive” quality of single leg leaping. Think of it as a GPP exercise for single leg jumps, and an SPP exercise for double leg jumping.

Again, with this in mind, I’ll almost always use a hurdle, or a series of hurdles if I am implementing this type of work. Otherwise, the ground contacts can be a little too long to be usable. Below is a sample of a single leg depth jump over an (importantly) collapsible hurdle. For even better results, perform this exercise in a series over lower hurdles where posture can be easily maintained, and contact time kept in check.

Depth Jump Family: Hurdle Hops

Where depth jumps are of a more powerful, single dose, nature, hurdle hops are a rhythmic, vibration like counterpart. In the landmark book “Running”, by Frans Bosch and Ronald Klomp, sprinting is noted to be a cyclic activity, with each stride closely linked to the last via reflex action. It is for this reason that high and long jumpers will often increase the cadence of their last few strides leading into takeoff because a faster frequency will allow a faster reflex of the takeoff mechanism itself (from the inverse-extension reflex). Each step on the approach is related to the step before it, and therefore, the plant step is related to the penultimate, and each step prior. Nobody jumps too high or far off one leg with long, loping strides all the way until the plant. Good jumpers will instinctively escalate the cadence of their pre-takeoff strides to yield a better reflex connection into the takeoff step. In this manner, each hurdle hop is related to the one before it.

Although hurdle hops are a bilateral activity, they are still cyclic in nature and based on reflexive mechanisms that bind each jump together. Because of this nature, along with the fact that the presence of a hurdle leads to quicker contact times, the hurdle hop is an invaluable counterpart to the depth jump in the world of shock plyometrics.

Also, because hurdle hops are an easier exercise to perform in a higher number of repetitions, they are an excellent tool for solidifying, and building on the mechanics learned through single response depth jumps. These can be done off one, or two legs, and I strongly recommend collapsible hurdles in either scenario! Hurdle hops can be spaced according to the goal of the day, or simply for variety’s sake. Farther apart hurdles will yield shorter touchdown times, and a premium on maintaining momentum. Closer hurdles will have a more powerful effect on the knee extensors muscles.

One of my personal favorite developmental plyometrics for the high jump event specifically is the double hurdle + big hurdle jump. In this exercise, two hurdles set the cyclic rhythm of the jump, and the last jump is over a max height hurdle. It’s a nice exercise for mimicking the quicker steps that tend to precede the powerful takeoff stride, along with a nice induction of variety into the training montage. You can see this exercise below in one of my “classic” (extremely poor quality and editing) YouTube videos.

Triple Jump Family

The next style of shock plyometrics goes into the “triple jump family”. Where depth jumps and hurdle hops develop the ability of an athlete to store and release energy in the vertical plane, bounding variations overload the sweep-like planting mechanism in the horizontal plane. There are plenty of ways to perform bounding for the sake of a better vertical jump, not to mention improved acceleration and sprint abilities. Here are a few bullet points on my thoughts regarding the art of bounding for improved jump power.

• A combination of bounding styles is best. Even if athletes aren’t triple jumpers, they will still benefit greatly from learning single leg, and left-left, right-right styles of bounding, as these work different portions of the stumble and inverse-extension reflexes seen in sprint gait.
• The single leg, and left-left, right-right style bound in particular trains an athlete to reduce excessive backside mechanics in the sprint gait cycle, the nature of the bound forcing a quicker transition back into a forward rotation of the swing thigh after the foot leaves the ground in push-off.
• Bounding should be addressed from both the shorter, multi-jump arena (such as standing triple jump), as well as the longer bounding means (various combinations over a distance of 20-40m). Short bounds develop power, and longer bounds build elasticity and jump reflex action, as well as some general jump capacity. The means of bounding that has the highest transfer to almost all track jumping events (as referenced in “Transfer of Training”) is a 10-fold bound from a standing start, which is a bit in the middle of short and long bounding sequences.
• Perform bounds from both a standing start, as well as a run-in. Record best distances for both styles.
• Don’t be afraid to end a shorter bounding session with a single “endurance” set, of 40-60+ meters. This works similarly to the way that a single high-rep drop set works in a strength training session. It is also useful practice for heavier jumpers with more muscle mass, as “endurance” work can assist in the rapid relaxation qualities of their muscle fibers.

The categories of bounding that I’ll generally use are that of:

• Short multi-jumps (3-5 jumps from a standing or running start).
• Longer bounds of 20-40m, which are nearly always done in the form of a “complex” where different types of bounds are performed in a circuit.

For multi-jumps, there is usually only one type of jump trained each day, and it is measured and recorded. A different approach is taken during the longer bounds. Since when doing a series of bounding of a moderate distance, muscle coordination is a premium adaptation, rather than raw power and recruitment, it also makes sense to include a variety of types of efforts. On training days where you are following up some specific jump efforts with plyometrics, I prefer the majority chunk of those auxiliary plyometrics to be more of the muscle-coordination variety, rather than all single effort bursts.

Bottom line, use short multi-jumps as a source of long-term measured improvement and use longer bounds in variety to build elasticity, muscle coordination, and some specific jump capacity.

Putting it all together

I often use a shock plyometric workout as a stand alone, or in partial volume to finish off an event specific practice on a high CNS training day. This type of workout is one that requires the athlete to be fairly fresh coming in, either off a day of rest, or a potentiation based day of resistance training and coordination based elastic work.

Most of my articles are a bit short on things like exact exercises, sets and reps, but in this one, I’ll give you a snapshot of some sample training constructs. The following are linear versions of my favorite combinations of high-powered shock training:

Vertical Vector Power Emphasis

1. Double leg depth jump to a target (3-5 sets x 2-5 reps)
2. Single leg depth jumps over a hurdle (2-5 sets x 2-4 reps)
3. Hurdle Hops (2-3 sets x 4-8 reps)
4. Bounding Combinations (100-250m)
5. Shot Throws (5-20 reps)

In this workout, the quality and breadth of the depth jumping will determine how many repetitions of the lower level, coordination based plyometrics are performed, such as the hurdle hops, and bounding combinations. The shot throws have more of an explosive, high-velocity reset nature to them, but their reps are also variable.

To steer this type of workout towards a raw force nature, the double and single leg depth jumps can be performed in a “drop-off” format, where the exercise is stopped as soon as an athletes maximal rebound jump starts to go down.

Vertical Vector Power-Speed Emphasis

1. Double leg drop jump over hurdle, or to another box (3-5 sets x 4-8 reps)
2. Double leg depth jump over a hurdle (3-5 sets x 3-6 reps)
3. Hurdle hops with generous spacing (2-4 sets x 3-6 reps)
4. Bounding combinations (200-400m)
5. Shot throws (5-20 reps)

Horizontal Vector Emphasis

1. Multi-jumps from a run-in, e.g. 5 bounds from a 5 stride run-in (x 4-8 reps)
2. Hurdle hops with generous spacing, 5-7’ apart (3-4 x 4-6 reps)
3. Depth Jumps, shorter box, shorter rest (3-6 sets x 4-8 reps)
4. Shot Throws (5-20 reps)

Combined Emphasis Sample I

1. Double Leg Depth Jump over 2 hurdles (4-10 sets x 1 reps)
2. Standing Triple Jump (x3-5)
3. Hurdle Hops (2-3 sets x 4-8 reps)
4. Bounding Combinations (100-300m)
5. Shot Throws (5-20 reps)

Conclusion

The depth jump and triple jump exercises, and their various offspring allow for a myriad of high-powered possibilities in the world of athletic development. Each exercise on its own is never the magic 8-ball of results, but putting powerful exercises together into complexes begins to sow the seeds of one’s highest level of athletic jump performance.

The next “workout” in this series will be that of plyometric (and human) variability. Stay tuned.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Bennet Watson, Managing Director, zFlo, Inc.

The promise of many new “sport-science” devices is very much alluring; we all want a device that can instantly capture research grade data and wirelessly connect to one’s phone with minimal investment. As a company, we know and recognize the potential that exists with accelerometers and gyroscopes – our company sells an IMU-based motion-analysis system that is a great tool for many clinical rehabilitation users, but there is a major difference between professional wearable systems and many of the devices that are currently entering the market. The gap between validated and objective measurement systems for professionals and consumer products marketed beyond their abilities is enormous. The traditional view is that there are two (sometimes) opposing categories: research systems and practical applications. Those days are long over. You do not have to compromise your data integrity – with the proper software, force-plates are just as easy to use and just as convenient as any wearable system. Are the wearable tools you are using to test athletes legit, or just hype?

Unfortunately, when hyped-up wearable products are tested for validity, the numbers just don’t add up. The result is that teams are left with junk data. This could mean literally years of important information lost because the measurement tool simply didn’t provide accurate and precise data. Even worse, teams are targeted as marketing pawns to project credibility onto start-up companies, and when the next round of funding comes, teams are eventually orphaned in favor of large consumer volumes that investors crave. Every few years this entire masquerade repeats, and college and professional teams soon go back to their old, technology-free ways, tired of being burned. My company has been providing tools to the top professionals in sport, healthcare, and research for over ten years now, and we will share the problems you are likely facing in sports science and explain what success looks like when real research-grade tools are employed. The goal of this guest article is not to use scare tactics to sell our services, but a necessary response to what we have seen over the last few years. The trend of hype and sell is rising, and if we can successfully educate the reader to what we see on a daily basis, then we have done our job. If we can emphasize one important lesson it is this: do your homework and be vigilant; dubious marketing gets slicker every day and will only become more deceptive. Ask yourself what the final result of your testing is – are you buying a cool device, or are you buying a solution?

An Inconvenient Truth with Sports Technology

A quick rundown of painfully learned lessons is listed here, all in brutal detail and honesty. Before you make any decisions about what you are investing into with sports technology, think about what you are promised to receive (in data) and ask if the company can fulfill and deliver it. When we work with professional teams and universities, the sheer amount of misinformation and marketing lies we have to debunk is frightening. Our business is working with professionals at every level, and that means we are not slaves to investors wanting millions of users to be looking at a smartphone app. Our business is supporting professionals that have their job on the line, not entertaining fitness consumers or trying to be acquired by Fitbit.

Lesson One

Reducing injuries means medical grade, not consumer level.

When working with a dual force plate and not a body sensor, the practitioner is collecting medical grade data one observes in the research papers. The use of weightlifting sensor technology is important, but direct testing of athletic movement is more predictive in nature. Average or Mean Power is a useful option for strength and conditioning coaches needing acceptable numbers, but for making career shaping decisions, force plates are the correct choice. Zeroing in on whether an ACL rehabilitation program is or is not doing its job should be a priority for multi-million dollar athletes or scholarship players. Basing decisions on cheap accelerometers from Asia is an expensive mistake – leave the micro sensors to pedometers and smartphones.

Lesson Two

If you hear “proprietary algorithms” it really just means “estimations.”

Eventually in time, very extensive and complicated calculations will be able to get measurements that replicate the gold standard tools, but most companies are not allocating resources to get high precision, especially when consumers are buying products before they are even available through well-marketed and positioned crowdfunding campaigns. The future is certainly exciting, but banking on device companies is rolling the dice: rather than getting data that directly assess forces, one is using statistical shortcuts. Keep in mind the weak link with calculations is the expensive costs of hiring qualified engineers rather than hoping Silicon Valley has enough college interns to do the job properly. Always ask the question who is deciding the fate of when an exercise is deemed valid, and think profits over science.

Lesson Three

Quality of data is a responsibility, not a luxury item.

Budgeting is a real plight for teams and clinics wanting to make improvements to athlete training or patient care. It’s better not to have a device or system giving dirty data and wait for a tool that appears to be a better option. The emotional comfort of having numbers does satisfy the itch to be doing something, but only valid information is helping the problem. Professional responsibility is an ethical dilemma, not something to be treated like improvements to nonessential nice-to-haves. It’s fine for staff to get excited about big ticket items like player tracking systems and force plates, but it’s also necessary when deciding the fate of an athlete’s body that is expected to be protected and developed.

Lesson Four

Sports performance data doesn’t mean telemedicine.

Continuous monitoring is useful for physiological data, but having a wearable on means the data is always collecting, and this means a lot of noise to sift through. A better option is properly evaluating standardized tests that have proven to be valid in published research. Based on the extensive research in Cologne, Germany, the subtle information on the force-time plot is more telling than an uncontrolled wild-west data dump. A real-time pipeline is just great in theory, but we are not there yet with reliable measurements to adjust and correct movements without controlled procedures. Our software does automatically detect invalid test performances, but the main point is that real insight comes from peeling the onion back more rather than getting more and more data.

Lesson Five

Invest in the future, don’t impulse buy for today.

A lot of teams feel pressured to keep up with the so-called arms race with sports technology and data. The wise way to handle the propaganda is to have a process in place that educates management and administration before the email reaches your inbox. No figurehead likes being last or late, but being too early also is a public blunder when most device companies are rushing to market and are exposed later. A force plate’s purpose is for industrial use, so it’s not fragile technology by any means and has proven itself over and over. Most force plates we have set up last longer than many companies in sports technology stay in business. When you are buying a force plate you are investing into the next decade or more; you are not buying something to give preseason media releases to write about that will collect dust next year.

What zFlo Force Systems Can Do for You

I can list more lies and warning lessons, but it’s not necessary. Just exposing the tip of the iceberg can simply alarm professionals in health and human performance to be skeptical and alerted.

If you are serious about providing quality of care to your athletes and are committed to bringing research grade data to your facility, we have made the task of integrating systems directly into the weight room or rehabilitation space. All our options are aligned with a core mission, bringing sports technology and the professional together. What we share with our clients is why we are promoted organically on podcasts and word of mouth from professional teams. We are here to serve anyone that is seeking to better understand motion of the human body and how it impacts every aspect of life – from athletics to clinical rehabilitation, product development, and consumer satisfaction, we know first-hand how powerful information can be when properly applied. So reach out to us and let’s talk about your goals with data-collection. Whether you already have force plates and simply need a software that can do the important calculations automatically and in a quick and easy workflow, or you’re interested in acquiring a set of plates – we want to hear from you.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Mario Gomez

I am a thief. Everything in my coach’s toolbox is stolen. I scour the Internet for the best coaching articles, troll social media for the best drills, befriend/stalk mentor coaches all over the country, and stock up on coaching videos and programs. I’ve always believed that if I am going to ask student athletes to work hard on the track, I need to do the same off of it.

After the end of last season, I attended two coaching clinics. The first was in Chicago. Coach Tony Holler spoke about timing fly 10s and publishing results. I stole his idea. Now we time our fly 10 times with Freelap and publish the results on social media. Chris Korfist and Dr. Tom Nelson talked about breathing and being activated. I also stole this information. Every athlete in our off-season knows about level 1 activation. We also encourage them to take 20 deep belly breaths when waking up, throughout the day, and before going to bed.

Two weeks later my insane friend and I took a 6-day road trip from El Paso to Boston to attend the Complete Track and Field summer clinic. Coaches from Harvard, Columbia, Brown, UMass, Boston, and Jacksonville University worked with high school athletes on warming up, accelerating, sprinting, jumping, and hurdling. I stole cues, drills, progressions, and ideas. I quickly realized these coaches were not just smart—really smart—but also that they conveyed their information in a simple manner through effective instruction.

Meeting coaches like Holler, Korfist, Nelson, Latif Thomas, Cal Dietz, Rueben Jones, Marc Mangiocotti, Joel Smith, Tony Veney, Dan Fitcher, Kebba Tolbert and so many others makes you quickly realize how little you know. But then you get excited because they are so willing to share their experience and knowledge. Ultimately what matters most to me is transferring what I learn and applying it for the benefit of my athletes and program in a simple and effective way.

I am a thief. Everything in my coach’s toolbox is stolen.
Click To Tweet

This aim was especially evident when Ron Grigg, Director of Cross Country/Track and Field at Jacksonville University, presented a fascinating lecture about three simple yet valuable drills: skipping for height, skipping for distance, and hurdle gallops. I left his clinic convinced that these drills could transform our jumping program.

Let me begin with the observation that the majority of jumping practice sessions I have witnessed make my heart ache for the kids. I am stupefied by some of the practice norms many coaches allow their athletes to create. For example, I’ve seen some middle school coaches let 15–20 kids practice multiple full-length approaches with an entire jumping sequence—including landings. High school coaches set up high hurdles within a few feet of the board so long jumpers can “jump” over the hurdles and create more height. They also set up mini-hurdles on the runway so triple jumpers can bound for more distance even though their form becomes completely compromised.

In the past, I’ve been guilty of silly or unnecessary drills. As a younger coach I believed that “more was better.” Simplifying is difficult, but that is Coach Grigg’s point with these three drills. If they are the only ones you do, you will keep it simple for your athletes, and they will still achieve their goals.

“These drills are like the ingredients on a spice rack,” Coach Grigg told me. “You can create something really good if you use the ingredients properly or you can create something rotten if they are not understood or misused. When done correctly the skips can turn into high-level drills, or when done poorly they can look very much like second grade recess time.”

He added, “You have to be able to watch, and know what you are looking to see. Being able to teach the very basics of posture, takeoff foot patterns, swinging segments usage, and displacement depends on observation.”

Video 1. The three key fundamentals include posture, takeoff foot pattern, and swinging segments.

Posture

When doing these drills, athletes should have proper posture. These posture cues also transfer to sprinters. Through the usage of the drills, Coach Grigg is “trying to use as much commonality between sprinting and jumping. The skills they are learning will make them better sprinters and athletes.”

The posture when performing the drills should be:

1. Neutral head — head down during acceleration is WRONG
2. Neutral pelvis — Stomach tight, back flat, hips up, butt tucked, belly button to spine: stable yet mobile
3. Absence of forward or backward lean

Sprint coaches will recognize many of the same cues used during acceleration and max velocity. Chins tucked or heads down forcefully during acceleration compromise foot contact placement (below or behind hips), mechanics, and the angles athletes are trying to achieve during acceleration. The postural cues help guide athletes during these specific low-force application drills, and they can transfer over during higher velocity drills and sprinting.

Takeoff Foot Patterns

The continuous nature of the drills allows athletes to feel the takeoff foot patterns they need to achieve when long jumping and triple jumping. These are the direct concepts Coach Grigg emphasizes:

1. Isometric preparation of ankles (and quadriceps)—dorsiflexed toe or 90-degree angle between the foot and shin. Strong stable ankles (and knees) at ground contact. Allows for bridging position during penultimate step.
2. Located under or slightly in front of COM to conserve horizontal velocity
3. Heel/toe rolling or flat rolling contacts (“Like a rocking chair,” Coach Grigg says)
4. Shin perpendicular at full foot support
5. PUSH on the ground, NOT pull

These explanations regarding takeoff foot patterns apply to the penultimate and jump steps in the long jump and the takeoff step in the triple jump. The biggest takeaway for athletes is being able to continually repeat these drills throughout the season and feel the takeoff foot patterns at low velocities. They learn what their feet should be doing and apply this knowledge when jumping at higher velocities.

Swinging Segments

Swinging segments refer to how athletes use their shoulders, arms, hips, and legs during the drills. The drills are introduced with lower forces and smaller movements to emphasize the feel and movement of the body. A common error is to move body parts and not the body. For example, an athlete may drive the arm without blocking and drive the knee high, yet the body doesn’t displace vertically. Through progressions, the athlete learns to move the body through smaller force applications, smaller ranges of motion, then gradually increase the forces—which will in turn increase the displacement and ranges of motion.

Eventually, skips for height ask athletes to generate as much as height as possible, and skips for distance ask athletes to cover as much distance as possible. However, many aspects needed to create successful horizontal jumps are often wasted motions when athletes participate in the traditional forms of these exercises. Done properly, the swinging segments will create:

1. Large and powerful amplitudes of movement
2. Synchronized movements that help timing and rhythms
3. Blocking—body parts STOP while the body continues to move

As the athlete’s shoulders, arms, hips, and legs generate movement, blocking/stopping them allows the body to continue moving and synchronize the timing of the jumps.

Fundamental Outcome

When done correctly and efficiently, an athlete’s posture, takeoff foot contact pattern, and swinging segments create elastic energy and displacement. Coach Grigg cues athletes to “move your body, not just your body parts,” essentially eliminating wasted motions and to “push, swing, and block” all occurring simultaneously) to help them time and synchronize the drills—and eventually the horizontal jumps.

Skips for Height

When skipping for height the athlete will be cued to do the following:

1. Move body up and forward
2. High hips, low knees
3. Like a soccer header, or a basketball rebound

Video 2. Skips for height.

A notable difference between a power skip for height and this one is that athletes are expected to keep their knees low and hips high. To create this movement, athletes feel the swing in their arms and then block the swinging motion. As the arm opposite the jump leg passes the hip on the downward stroke it will be blocked, but the hips will continue to rise, and the athlete’s body will continue upward and forward. The arm driving forward opposite the swing leg will also be blocked. This causes the swing leg knee and thigh to stop moving up and then work back down into a straightened position, thereby allowing the swing leg foot to work down below the hip. This position resembles sprinting action where the free leg will back down toward the track beneath the hip (center of mass).

Skips for Distance

When skipping for distance the athlete will be cued to do the following:

1. Move body forward and up
2. Feel your takeoff foot behind you
3. Push the thigh forward
4. Block the thigh low

Video 3. Skips for distance.

In this form of skipping for distance, the arms will be blocked in a similar but even lower manner as they are in skips for height. The jump leg, however, serves a different purpose. The coach cues athletes to feel their takeoff foot behind them, allowing the body to move forward and up. The athlete pushes the swing leg hip and thigh forward and then blocks them low. As a result, the free leg works back down into a straightened position, allowing the shin to open up and create an acute—or close to a 90-degree—angle with the swing leg dorsiflexed foot.
The importance of this cue transfers to the first phase of the triple jump. I believe we spend more than enough time cueing the jump leg in the triple jump but often neglect the swing leg. If we cue the athlete to push the swing leg thigh forward then block it low, it works back down as previously stated. Additionally, it sets up an elastic swing during the hop phase.

Hurdle Gallops

When athletes jump over a low barrier or a mini-hurdle/wicket, they are cued to do the following:

1. High hips, low knees
2. Feel the swing
3. Feel the block

Video 4. Hurdle gallops.

Hurdle gallops take the requirements of both skipping exercises and ask the athlete to apply them. As a result, the drill requires its own set of skills. During skips for height, the primary movement of the body is vertical (up) and then out. During skips for distance, the primary movement is horizontal (out) and then up. Hurdle gallops ask the athletes for equal levels of both horizontal and vertical displacements due to the placement and height of the hurdles. Each coach will have to play around with the distances based on their athletes’ skill and mastery. Coach Grigg places 6” banana hurdles about 3 meters apart because of the skill and ability of his Jacksonville female athletes.

Whatever the distance, athletes must generate enough force application to jump over the hurdle, and enough distance to be in position to clear the ones that follow. Too much height and the athlete will not be able to jump over the next hurdle. Conversely, too much distance and the athlete will knock over the hurdles by not generating enough height.

While posture, takeoff foot placement, and swinging segments remain the same in hurdle gallops, a combination of height and distance are required to be successful. You can make this drill more challenging by having athletes gallop over higher hurdles or increasing the distance between the hurdles—or both.

Conclusion

Coach Grigg notes that if you watch an athlete walk, then jog, and finally sprint, you will notice many of the same patterns. Walking and jogging at low speeds transfer to how an athlete warms up, skips, jogs, and ultimately sprints. This is especially evident in competition. Athletes—especially those with a low training age—tend to revert to what is most comfortable or natural. These three drills allow the coach to cue proper posture, proper foot strike, and synchronization of upper body and lower body movements that will transfer to sprinting. Proper takeoff foot patterns, swing and blocking movements, and displacement will transfer to horizontal jumpers.

We coach in an era where complicated, and dazzling drills are easily accessible online and coaches buy into training programs/videos loaded with overly complex, yet compelling and “sexy” drills. As coaches we need to focus on the fundamentals even if it they are not “sexy” because that will ultimately get our athletes the results they strive to achieve. Echoing motivational speaker Jim Rohn, Coach Grigg ended his presentation by saying, “Success is neither magical nor mysterious. Success is the natural consequence of consistently applying basic fundamentals.”

Please share so others may benefit.

By Tony Holler

The upcoming Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium has people talking about the connection of football and track programs. I’ve received numerous emails describing football programs who hoard athletes, mandate year-round lifting, and promote the curse of 7-on-7 competitions in the spring. I’ve also received confirmations of enlightened football coaches who value athleticism and embrace track programs. It is what it is.

On Friday, Dec 11, the title of my opening clinic presentation is “The 10 Essentials of Being a Sprint Coach and the Main Thing”.

One of my essentials, maybe my #1-ranked essential, sprint coaches must promote their program, recruit talented kids, and attract great athletes.

What if we boycotted the idea of promote, recruit, and attract? What if we simply accepted those who show up? “All those interested in running track this spring, please meet in room 316 after school on Wednesday” Who would show up? I think I can answer that question. Most of those attending would be distance athletes from the cross country team. You may get a few “I want to try track” kids. If you are lucky, you might get one or two speedy guys. Guess who doesn’t show up for that meeting? … wide receivers, running backs, linebackers, linemen, and defensive backs. Football players will be noticeably absent from your first organizational meeting. You definitely won’t see any of the specialized athletes from your school. Soccer, baseball, and basketball players typically don’t consider the idea of being a multi-sport athlete. However, good track coaches are good persuaders.

Promotion

Promotion includes website and Twitter work. Twitter has been a game-changer for track programs. Track coaches and track athletes now share their enthusiasm with thousands of followers. 20 years ago, only a few people knew I had a high jumper who cleared 7’0” on 13 occasions his senior year. Now, 1400 people read about my top freshman, Joe Stiffend, running a 0.99 10m fly in practice. Track athletes and track fans, living in today’s information age, are intensely aware of other programs and participants.

Word-of-mouth marketing is essential in the business world. The same can be said about track & field. Never underestimate the importance of track athletes spreading the good word about your program. Happy track teams thrive. Nothing dooms a program faster than unhappy athletes.

Recruitment

Recruitment is similar to promotion. Where promotion addresses all the boys in your school, recruitment is specific. When you find that tall kid from Jamaica, who has never played a sport in his life, you recruit him. I found Randy Gordon walking the hallways in 2011. Randy became an all-state track athlete in his rookie senior season. See picture below.

This picture was taken at the 2011 IHSA State Championship. This was the final race of the day, the 3A 4×4. Randy Gordon, the kid who had never been on a team of any kind until his final semester of high school, was running the 3rd leg for us. Earlier in the day, Randy ran a 22.2 split helping us to a 4th place finish in the 4×2. Here he ran 50.2 and put us in a position to win the race.

Attraction

Attraction is similar to promotion and recruitment, but more subtle. Attraction includes having great uniforms and attending first-class meets. Attraction includes having a sprint program that treats cats like cats, not dogs. Attraction includes having competitive practices where speed is measured. Athletes are attracted to sports where their efforts are rewarded. If you want fast athletes … record, rank, and publish their practice times.

What if every fast kid in your school ran track? Hell, you’d be a pretty good coach. Plow horses never win the Kentucky Derby. Distinguished coaches understand promotion, recruitment, and attraction.

How about football coaches? I believe football coaches fall into two categories. One category resembles everything I’ve said about great track coaches. They promote, recruit, and attract great athletes to their program. These Renaissance men of the football world conduct enthusiastic high-speed low-volume practices. Athletes look forward to all things football and encourage their friends to join the team. When I think about the other category of football coaches, I picture thick-ankled, hairy-legged, tunnel-vision guys who can’t seem to get along with their colleagues. These old-school guys put their players through a trial by fire at every practice. They live by motivational clichés and military envy. Unlike the Renaissance group, these coaches believe that toughness wins games.

Maybe there was a time when generals could coach football and be successful. Bear Bryant was a believer in torturous practices and old-school discipline. Bear once said, “I make my practices real hard because if a player is a quitter, I want him to quit in practice, not in a game.” I’m thankful the Bear Bryant days are in the past. Great football coaches need to learn from great track coaches. The football program attracting the best athletes will always have an advantage over their opponents.

John Brumund-Smith

Recently, a Chicago-area track coach, John Brumund-Smith contacted me about coming to our upcoming Consortium. He also shared this:

I’m not sure I can attend the clinic (I coach swimming in the winter), but I want to let you know I read your article on football players running track last year, and it had a major impact on me. I made some “posters” to hang up in the school emphasizing how good football players (and certain other athletes) have performed in Track & Field. I would actually notice people stopping in the middle of their passing period to read them, holding up traffic behind them.

With posters, Coach Brumund-Smith of Lake Forest H.S. has figured out a way to promote his program, recruit talented kids, and attract great athletes.

Lake Forest is a high school of almost 1700 students to the north of Chicago. In 2008, Lake Forest had a 4×1 team break the 44-second mark for the first time in school history. Opening in 1935, it took Lake Forest High School 73 years to run a sub 44.00 in the 4×1. Sub-44 is Plainfield North’s fresh-soph goal every year.

When Coach Brumund-Smith took over the program in 2012, the sprints saw huge improvements, running 4×1 times of 42.67 in 2013 and 42.06 in 2014. How does a non-sprint school become a sprint school? You guessed it; promote, recruit, and attract.

More from Lake Forest Coach John Brumund-Smith:

One thing that has really helped our sprint program out has been getting football players to come out for track, even if they’ve never run before. In 2013, we had a senior named Scott Powell come out for track for the first time in his life. He was a star running back on the football team and had played lacrosse his first three years at Lake Forest. Scott ran 11.29 for us in the 100m and ran lead-off on our 4x100m Relay team that ran 42.67 to shatter our school record and qualify for the State Championships. Three of our 4x100m athletes were football players. Scott Powell was a running back, Austin McIlvaine was a defensive lineman, and Nick Giordano was a wide receiver.

The next year, 2014, we were gifted with an athletic senior from football who had never run track before. Conner Hayes had played baseball his whole life and played wide receiver on the football team. He was frustrated with baseball, but was the fastest kid on the team, and decided to give track a try. He went 21’7″ in the Long Jump and ran anchor on our 4x100m Relay team that once again featured three football players (McIlvaine and Blumeyer were on the team again, along with another senior, Connor Adams, who played cornerback in football).

That foursome won the County, Conference and Sectional titles. They broke the Lake County Championships record in the 4x100m Relay and broke the school record with a time of 42.06 seconds. Three of the four members of that 42.06 4x100m team were football players. My three alternates were all football players too.

We were hoping for our third straight State trip in the 4x100m Relay last spring, but coming into Sectionals it appeared we had a better chance with our individuals. My three fastest kids didn’t run on the 4x100m Relay at Sectionals, but we still ran 43.39, with three football players and a basketball player. Our fastest kid last year, Quinn Julian, ran 11.23 and 22.42. He’s the star running back on Lake Forest’s football team this year.

The Posters of Coach Brumund-Smith

I’ll let Coach Brumund-Smith give the caption for the poster above:

Here’s another poster I made today. It’s specific to my program, of course, but still pretty cool (the three towns that feed into Lake Forest High School are Knollwood, Lake Forest, and Lake Bluff). I got the idea from watching Bro Science videos on Facebook, haha. Obviously the goal of our lifting isn’t to bulk, but still …

+++

When coaches like John Brumund-Smith share their work, everyone benefits. How can you read this and not ask yourself three important questions:

1. Am I promoting my program?
2. Am I recruiting great kids?
3. Does my program attract great athletes?

For more discussion of how to improve football and track programs, consider attending the Dec 11-12 Track-Football Activation Consortium at Montini High School in Lombard, IL.
To purchase your ticket, click here.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

Some of the most underrated and valuable professionals manage sports nutrition. They play a vital role in getting athletes better. The greatest ones change lives, not just diets. On the other hand, many nutritionists are outdated and ineffective. Choosing the right nutritionists and evaluating their impact can be challenging. Nutrition is a very difficult area to evaluate outside of body composition and blood chemistry. No stomach monitor exists, and other areas of nutrition measurement are invasive and impractical.

The conventional style of nutrition support doesn’t work. The “nutrition therapy” model—great for private psychologists but which fails to deliver results for athletes—needs to change. I have spent good money on nutritionists and worked with some great people who have made me more effective. Over the years, I have witnessed an amazing change with nutritional guidance. I believe that championships—ranging from the local level to the entire world—in swimming and track are the result of eating better. Cutting-edge and technology-savvy sports nutritionists are the rekindled secret weapon. Take care of them as they influence the results of a program multiple times a day. Unfortunately, not having the right person results in lost opportunities and a colossal waste of money.

I have worked with many nutritionists. Ten years ago I hired John Berardi to help my high school athletes smash state records in swimming and get into better D1 colleges as a result of smarter sports nutrition. Now that technology and sport science have evolved, the new era is going to be more interactive with athletes and their nutrition practices. Here are six factors in choosing the best person for your nutrition program.

They Are Nutrition Coaches Instead of Nutrition Consultants

Talk is cheap, but not when it comes to consulting fees. Some nutrition programs are hampered by their business models, making results limited to contact or face–to-face time. Many people hire a personal trainer to work with them at top dollar three times a week for months. But if nutrition impacts someone multiple times a day, why do we see a nutritionist once a month tops? The reason is similar to exercise. Many people think they already know what to eat, or read the latest diet books and become instant experts. Everyone can eat. Even toddlers do it on their own. But how many of us eat right? And what is right? With so many Ph.D. experts disagreeing, no wonder people tackle nutrition on their own instead of listening to real expert advice.

The new model is nutrition coaching— working with people instead of working with diets. What amazes me is that some nutritionists seem to become more like IRS food auditors, combined with a portion of educational advice. Instead of talking about macronutrients and other boring elements, nutrition coaching is about high-impact issues like athletes drinking to deal with physical pain and pressure. The really ugly problems one can address are the ones that will more impact life changes. Lecturing about broccoli and calories in soda may work for moms and dads with their children, but rarely with athletes. Athletes are people and have people problems. The goal of nutrition coaching is to address solutions and motivate on the benefits the changes will create.

The new model is nutrition coaching— working with people instead of working with diets.
Click To Tweet

A good measure of an effective nutritionist is the obstacles athletes overcome—eating disorders, fast food behaviors, and poor lifestyle habits. Tackling the hard stuff means the most common and basic challenges are easy to deal with and fall into place.

They Focus on Engagement and Enjoyment Rather than Education

I have a saying that resonates with a lot of people: “It’s not what you know; it’s what you can get your athletes to do.” I am outraged that many professionals love lecturing about new information when they don’t question why athletes don’t adhere to information they already know to be important and factual. The key for getting people better is to do the things that matter, not wait to do the advanced stuff when they can do basic stuff right now.

Catered meals based on the needs of athletes is a measured solution versus boring lectures and weak education ideas. Sometimes having a prepared option like the FreshMealPlan works like a charm.

When hiring a nutritionist, some coaches look for expertise and someone to “talk to the kids” or “schedule a meeting” with individuals. Instead, coaches should look at what they are doing to make nutrition a healthy celebration of life versus “fueling strategies.” I keep resorting to the same mistake—trying to make athletes better by suggesting solutions based on dietary augmentation versus trying to connect better to make them appreciate nutrition and enjoy the process.

It’s not what you know; it’s what you can get your athletes to do.
Click To Tweet

Food from a sports nutrition perspective is often too biological. Sure, the science must be sound. But we are not fueling cars, we are feeding people. When engagement and enjoyment decrease, so do adherence and compliance. When food is celebrated and properly consumed, it’s a lifetime commitment to eating as a part of the social responsibility of the human race instead of “eating for me.” Modern society is aware of fair trade and free range, so eating is no longer just about calories and taste preferences. People are showing more and more interest in how food is ethically grown and prepared.

Teams that eat together and get more involved with the entire process will get better results than bland lectures or presentations. Education must be part of the nutrition solution, though not the entirety. Sometimes a few quick, goal-based presentations can mold athletes, but making food enriching is about having a passion beyond supplement strategies.

They Interact with Data Daily

Athlete monitoring is great, but the nutrition side seems to be limited to calculating calories versus crunching what matters. The new future is going to be about making the lives of athletes more efficient in doing the basics such as shopping, eating on the run, and preparing meals more intelligently. Data is a buzzword, but recordkeeping can’t be just the amount of beverages and protein powder orders. It must be deeper and wider. There are four essential elements:

• Body composition – I realize body composition and weight are tricky with eating disorders, but not measuring or evaluating will not make them go away since mirrors and scales are so freely available. Eating disorders are beyond the scope of this article, but, for the most part, a healthy and honest relationship will make it better for all parties when solid relationships of trust exist. Body composition should be seen as a health marker, and measuring should be done at a frequency that is healthy to the population. Nutritionists should be part of the responsibility for keeping people in athletic form safely.
• Bone density – Building bone health is an area that needs more attention. Workload and nutrition can improve or impair bone health. Bad things happen when athletes get stress fractures due to vitamin D deficiencies or mileage doesn’t match bone status.
• Glycogen stores – Even if athletes are efficient metabolizers of fat stores, glycogen is the high-octane fuel for sports. Some pro athletes have issues with consuming enough carbohydrates because they may be very large and still have normal appetites. Add busy schedules and long practice times to the equation, and normal eating results in poor energy stores. What I tend to see are “bar and beverage” solutions that mask the problem of using a calendar and slowing things down. If you eat on the run, nutrition coaching must be dialed in instead of buying convenience calories.
• Biochemistry – I have dedicated my career to zeroing into athlete biochemistry because I have seen athletes rebound and crash from its details. No matter if it’s high school or pro, getting blood cell and vitamin/mineral status are the direct way of knowing what is going on. Subjective food logs or other estimates are useful, but what’s written may not be what is absorbed or even actually consumed.

Obviously one can involve ever-increasing amounts of data, but nutritionists should have their hands full with these four needs. Most nutritionists in college work with all athletes, so the ratio of support is very demanding. Still, those big four data points must be managed every day for real changes in injury rates and performance.

They Give Athlete-Specific Advice Instead of General Advice

My favorite example of awesome nutrition support came 15 years ago when I had just started to dig into high performance. I had the opportunity to work with Jennifer Hutchinson, nutritionist for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. When we started using her services, she focused on getting to know the underlying patterns and profile of the athletes with a three-page questionnaire that got to the heart of the matter: knowing the athlete. The basics of nutrition matter but they must be tailored to the individual.

Nutrition is highly unique to the tastes and preferences, not just the content of the food and supplementation. Using the Goals and Questionnaires of InsideTracker.com is a wise investment for precision style meal plans.

Also, merely getting reams of data on athletes without knowing their backstory isn’t effective. For example, those of a specific heritage may not eat the way their family does, or someone may be a vegan for the wrong reasons. Many eating patterns are dynamic, meaning the data will float and change based on several factors. Here’s how to develop a good diet plan:

• Profile – Sometimes profiling is a bad thing, sometimes it’s essential to solving crimes—but with nutrition be careful. A profile of an athlete is a starting place. Since this information may change, don’t base everything on the first assessment. Many times nutritionists will create a series of buckets to lump people together. While this is convenient, it’s better to let the athletes fall into N=1 versus typing. Grouping is fine for managing, but solving the needs of individuals is paramount in the long run.
• Preferences – What and where people like to eat is good to know, but the starting points in athletes are not what will achieve goals and dreams. Preferences are currently favored options and will be obsolete or overplayed if not managed. Suggesting that athletes have an omelet every day—even if they athlete like it—will backfire. The goal is to expand and rotate interests to improve compliance and provide custom food options based on a journey and discovery, not matching old initial data of an individual.
• Patterns – Failure leaves clues, and so does success. Patterns of eating habits are a great way to see how people make decisions. Devoting a lot of attention to behavior modification is gaining traction in the general coaching world, and for good reason. Coaches try to change athletes, and that starts with changing what is consistently happening. In giving dietary advice, make sure you look for the stationary targets (patterns) versus the moving ones.
• Planning – Teaching planning is better than only teaching adjustments. Nutritionists should focus on creating ways for individuals to be independently focused and constructively selfish. A simple example of avoiding guilt by association is not falling for the lowest common denominator. Athletes socialize and live with others. Often they eat to the average of who they are around the most or to the lowest person.

To summarize, giving impacting information or suggestions means you must get more information on the person you are working with—that leads to a higher percentage of adoption.

They Focus on Meal Systems Rather than Food Logs

Many nutritionists love smartphone apps to log meals as that solves the need to measure nutrition subjectively. I find food logging is okay for some, but others don’t like doing it and the support system crashes. The cardinal mistake one can do is get volunteer data without feedback, and having the burden of 21 meals a week can make the exchange between nutritionist and athlete very difficult. It’s better to have a meal system in which one logs lack of compliance rather than recording everything after the meal or snack.

Meal systems are ways to eat, rather than just listing meals. Many variables can make meal plans fail, so it’s better to focus on conceptual and important variables rather than exact food lists. An essential part of successful monitoring is always giving back something useful or rewarding inputs. One-way communication is not sustainable or enjoyable.

An example of a meal system is the responsibility of becoming successful with breakfast. Getting athletes to wake up and eat is far from simple. Some athletes have to train early, some don’t, some do intermittent fasting and eat later in the day. No matter what, the first meal matters. The solution for breakfast and other self-prepared meals is shopping, sorting, preparing, and cleaning. Focusing on the nuances of getting food from raw and unorganized to palatable entails a lot of steps, and distilling to what is repeatable over time is why I listen to Landon Evans. He emphasizes simple things like rotating fruits in cottage cheese, changing protein powders in yogurt, and mixing up spices and flavoring for quick-start frittatas.

They Focus on Teaching Cooking Instead of Following Recipes

Don’t get me wrong—recipes are the end solution or applied part of nutrition. But giving recipes without knowing or evaluating the skills and tools of those you are sending them to usually makes no sense. Teaching someone how to cook basic meals empowers that individual to be independent and remove barriers.

Shopping and preparing meals is indeed work, but anyone with simple cooking skills and a decent amount of time can whip up meals that are better and less expensive than cafes, restaurants, and dining halls. Blue Apron and HelloFresh are great starting points for busy athletes, as they are a nice method of getting people started with cooking. In order, here are the big four skills athletes from high school all the way up to elites should learn.

• Blend – The lowest hanging fruit is making sure athletes are not inept. Making smoothies isn’t complicated, and the need for a quick snack or meal replacement is real. Knowing how to use a blender makes things one step better.
• Heat – Using a crockpot, microwave, or stove involves simply following directions and being present. It’s the intermediate step to something more.
• Bake – The next step after heating up food is baking. While baking is not much different than heating something up, the time required and margin for error are high unless one is experienced.
• Fry or grill – Many athletes like grilling, especially down South. They can learn to stir-fry and grill meats and vegetables, and starting with the simpler options first increases the success rate.

Teaching someone to cook doesn’t mean you have to go to an athlete’s living quarters. It’s just about asking them to get out of their comfort zone a little.

Parting Thoughts on Nutritionists and Athletes

Proper nutrition is a great way for athletes to get better. It has always been my core element in training. Coaches spend hours and weeks on programming and planning training with intricate periodization plans, but usually only craft quick emails on nutrition. Nutrition is a major investment requiring staff and people vested in a program, not an outsourced solution that merely creates an illusion of covering the bases.

If you are a high-performance advisor, make sure your nutritionist has these six qualities. If you are a high school or youth coach, exposure to this list will help get things on the right path. While not all athletes respond to advice or suggestions, having something in place gives you a chance to tap into an amazing part of sports performance.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Craig Pickering

Every day, a wide range of chemical reactions take place in our bodies. Some of the most important ones create energy—energy we require to stay alive. These reactions often give off byproducts. Some can be toxic and damaging to the body.

One type of byproducts is free radicals. A specific type, Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS), is a natural result of the metabolization of oxygen for energy. When we create greater amounts of energy, such as in exercise, we will produce more of these ROS. The ROS produced during exercise may cause fatigue and damage muscles—hampering performance and delaying recovery.

Fortunately, athletes, nutritionists, and coaches are aware of this increase in ROS during and after exercise. They often use antioxidant supplements to improve performance and recovery. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) reports that over 50% of elite endurance and male collegiate athletes regularly take antioxidant supplements. This practice is not limited to athletes. Approximately 20% of non-athletes also regularly use antioxidant supplements.

Since ROS are produced during exercise, it seems logical that antioxidant supplementation could offset this increase, thereby reducing acute fatigue and decreasing recovery time. Is this true?

Muscle Damage and Antioxidants

This is a difficult question to answer. We know intuitively that exercise can cause muscle damage. I’m sure we have all experienced delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). We also know that eccentric exercise—in which the muscle is contracting while simultaneously lengthening—is the type of exercise that likely creates the greatest amounts of muscle damage.

Because of this, researchers often use eccentric exercise to induce muscle damage. That enables them to measure the effects of antioxidant supplementation on recovery. For example, this study took a group of healthy women aged 19–31 through eccentrically loaded bicep exercises over a four-day period. Half the group took an antioxidant supplement containing 400IU Vitamin E, 1000mg vitamin C, and 90ug selenium. The other half took a placebo.

The researchers measured levels of creatine kinase (CK)—a marker of muscle damage—in the subjects following the exercises. They also poked the subjects’ muscles to see how sore they were. The group taking the supplement had much lower CK levels during the recovery period, and this difference was greatest at the end of the four-day period. Muscle soreness was also lower in the supplementation group after two and three days as well.

These results indicate that antioxidant supplementation is useful for improving recovery from hard exercise. However, this study has a couple of problems. The group was relatively small, and the subjects had not undergone resistance training for 12 months. This not only demonstrates the importance of understanding the makeup of research groups but also underlines the difficulty researchers may encounter in recruiting appropriate subjects. Many athletes are training too hard to take part in research like this. Finally, the damaging effects of eccentric exercise could be much lower in trained athletes. To have results worth reporting, researchers often use non-athletes.

Oxidative Stress Responses

Fortunately, there is research among habitual exercisers, like this one conducted among professional basketball players in Spain. The players either took a placebo or an antioxidant supplement containing vitamin E, vitamin C, and beta-carotene, this time for 32 days. During that time, the subjects played one or two games a week along with daily training sessions. The results showed that the athletes in the supplement group had much lower levels of oxidative stress, allowing us to conclude that antioxidant supplementation does reduce oxidative stress levels. The same is also true for regular aerobic exercise.

These studies suggest that taking antioxidants might reduce the oxidative stress response to exercise. Is this a good thing? Intuitively, we would say yes. Less muscular and cellular damage means better/faster recovery, which in turn means we can either do more training or train at a higher level. But is this actually the case? One issue to consider is that one of the mechanisms by which exercise improves performance is that the ROS themselves drive many positive adaptations to exercise. If we remove or dampen the ROS response to exercise, we often see a reduction in adaptation to the training dose.

For example, in this study, the researchers examined the effect of antioxidant supplementation on improving insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetics. They found that only those who did not take supplemental antioxidants showed improvements in insulin sensitivity. As a result, exercise lost much of its positive effects in this group if they consumed high-dose antioxidant supplements. While this finding doesn’t influence athletes—they generally don’t exercise for insulin sensitivity reasons—it could impact how much exercise can improve health outcomes.

Effects on Athletic Parameters

What about the effects on athletic parameters? This hasn’t been extensively studied. Some research shows that high doses of vitamin C can reduce improvements in VO2 max in endurance athletes. In this study, researchers gave subjects either 1g of vitamin C or a placebo every day over an eight-week training block. Training improvements were reduced in the supplement group compared to the placebo. However, one issue (aside from the low sample size) is the fact that VO2max isn’t an event. While we might assume that greater improvements carry over to improvements in race performance at 400m+, the data isn’t clear. What would be better are studies that examine the effect of antioxidant supplementation on race performance—and those are very scarce!

Interestingly, some studies indicate that lower amounts of antioxidants could be more beneficial than higher doses. In this review article, the authors found that, out of 12 eligible studies, 8 showed no effect of antioxidant supplementation. Two showed that antioxidant supplementation reduced performance (i.e. was ergolytic), and two showed that it improved performance (i.e. was ergogenic).

However, in the non-effective or ergolytic trials, the doses of vitamins C and E were much higher than in the ergogenic trials. A typical daily vitamin C intake in the ergogenic trials was between 200m and 400mg; in the ergolytic trials it was generally around 1000mg. The 200-400mg level is easily achievable through appropriate food. For example, a large bell pepper and 100g of kale contain 300mg of vitamin C. Conversely, consuming 1000mg through food alone is much harder, and would likely rely on a supplement to reach that level.

These effects are further illustrated in another study, although again the focus is on endurance athletes. In this study, participants took either 1000mg vitamin C or blackcurrant juice (containing 15mg vitamin C) each day for three weeks before a 5K time trial. The results indicated that vitamin C supplements appeared to reduce running speed and performance, and also led to an increase in inflammatory markers. The blackcurrant juice group didn’t have those effects.

Conclusions

What does all this mean? We know we need a certain amount of oxidative stress to adapt to exercise and improve from it. If we are too good at recovering, we dampen this oxidative stress response and, therefore, underadapt. One potential cause could be high-dose antioxidants. Early research in this field supports this conclusion. It seems far more prudent to get the majority of our antioxidants from “real” food sources. These sources contain lower doses of antioxidants and a wide range of other healthful compounds, including flavonoids that likely work synergistically with the more recognized antioxidants. The issue here is finding foods high in these nutrients, especially when faced with mineral depletion in soils.

Another aspect could be the timing of the antioxidant dose. Since the majority of oxidative stress occurs during and directly after training, it might not be a good idea to take an antioxidant supplement or other vitamin tablets at this point. On the other hand, consuming food is likely to be fine. So there is no need to avoid fruits and vegetables immediately after exercise. However, in the case of poor food availability, such as travel or caloric restrictions, low-dose antioxidant supplementation might be worthwhile to support normal nutrient intakes.

Please share so others may benefit.

By Carl Valle

I have visited enough pro, college, and high school teams to see what some shrewd coaches have done and what others need to do better. To keep you from slowly learning through trial and error, I will save you time and money by sharing what makes a great training environment and technologies that can help or hamper it. I have been on the support side for technology for 13 years and helped teams deal with complex issues by making things quick and easy.

This article can help make any training facility—from high school to elite—cutting edge without breaking the bank. My goal is to get you started with best practices by pointing out mistakes many coaches are lured into by listening to companies with no experience or understanding of what it takes to keep a group of athletes organized and coached properly. Don’t worry about what other teams are doing. Most of the hype is smoke and mirrors. Instead, put your trust into polishing the basics.

Coaching First, Technology Second

Weight rooms are entering the “science lab” era of evolution, and some coaches worry about being left behind. My coaching friend Bob Alejo explained to me years ago that the most cutting-edge element of coaching is . . . coaching itself. It doesn’t matter if you are using the latest software or coolest smart fabric to get physiological and training loads. Program design and the ability to instruct are timeless. With the increasing reliance on technology, I see more “digital dark ages” with training. The problem is getting worse. Instead of complaining on Twitter, I crunched all the technology reviews I have done for pro and college teams and came up with a “greatest hits” of the most common and useful suggestions suitable for all levels.

The most cutting-edge element of coaching is coaching itself.
Click To Tweet

General Warning on Technology: Design Trumps Flash Every Time

The best weight rooms function well regardless of whether chalkboards or Apple TV-enabled flat screens are on the side. The core issue with most weight rooms is that they want to add technology to a bad set-up. It amazes me that many quarter-million-dollar weight rooms struggle to function, even with full-time staff and a dozen volunteer coaches. Here is a brief checklist of what you need before adding the latest tech.

• Lean and Clean – Weight room design should be minimalist, with only the essentials. I am disgusted when I see $50K worth of machines with no business being in a modern weight room, like adductor ThighMasters and preacher curls areas. Focus on racks, open space for jump training, and keeping everything spotless. Infections begin in the weight room. I won’t get into cleaning details, but a clean weight room wins games. Heavy training and poor hygiene are a bad combination.
• Focus on Barbells – It’s fine to have other loaded options like dumbbells and weight vests as they are excellent tools, but eventually the use of barbells teaches that getting stronger is the way to get better in team sports. If your weight room looks like a recreation or hotel fitness center you are doomed. We need more training halls that zero in on basic lifts. Overload is boring and not sexy, but focusing on the basics isn’t slowing down Dr. Nic Gill in his work with the New Zealand All-Blacks.
• Segregate Medical and Regeneration – Medical and regeneration areas don’t need to be connected physically. Instead of therapists showing up doing return to play as guests, just use an AMS platform that enables the coach to know what he or she can do and cannot do. A training table in the weight room doesn’t make a program progressive. When athletes focus on recovery, why blast heavy metal while they stretch or do self-care work? It’s like planting a Zen meditation rock garden next to a construction zone or airport.

Design Elegantly—Excel or Cloud Software Solutions

This tip is the most important. The worst technology practices involve online training software and Excel templates. Some great stuff exists, but 90% of what I see makes me want to throw up or give up. I have made some amazing templates and used simple white boards.The secret is the elegant design of training and then the needs of programming in Excel or AMS tools.

Currently, the coaching bottleneck is not writing workouts. Instead, it’s not having access to universal and creative tools to design workouts based on contemporary training theory. It is embarrassing that a 12-year-old with GarageBand software has a better option to do his or her “art” while we are stuck with either hand-me-down Excel templates or suffer from online software that is inflexible and slow as molasses. Coaches go blind with entering data and resemble Zoolander trying to break the computer when the formulas get screwed up. Even the best tools are just electronic versions of graph paper, and we are killing trees with all the cards printed each day.

Another emerging problem is that the only real-time individualization that comes to training is the weight room. Writing workouts for 400 student-athletes, all customized according to needs and current states of orthopedic and fatigue readiness, can singlehandedly increase the divorce rate among performance coaches. Trying to have a life and do a good job with a standard program runs the risk of being labeled “cookie-cutter coaches” or lazy.

The solution is a constraints approach to workouts and focusing on what is realistic and creates a high impact to transfer. I hate the term KISS, so I prefer KICK—Keep It Clear Knucklehead. I start training with metrics or tests that best summarize my training, not testing the talent of athletes. I have seen several athletes show up and dominate speed and power combines because they are genetically gifted, but conditioning and skilled lifting sessions seem to show who is training well and who is just talented and loaded with great DNA.

After testing what you feel are the key benchmarks for training and performance, focus on workouts that best get you there. In the past, I would design based on periodization books. I have over 300 books on annual planning or training. Most are Sports Sci-Fi—not historical workouts of legendary coaches, but self-proclaimed experts drinking their own Kool-Aid and living in a fantasy.

By moving to a benchmark and data-driven programs with practical considerations of environment and time, periodization becomes straightforward instead of Eastern European riddles. Workouts become clear and easier to write. Your energy should be on coaching up an elegant program with hands-on instruction and guidance, rather than working on a block of training needing to be concurrent or conjugate.

Be recursive and repetitive. Music and poetry use repetition to empathize their message. Training is similar. Making changes at the genetic level and disturbing homeostasis isn’t easy, so keep sending the right signals. Not only is repeating training helpful for teaching, but it’s also smarter for monitoring and managing development. If workouts look random, it’s hard to see what is getting better without direct comparison.

Finally, think modular. Most workouts can be built by a series of connections of modular training units that can be plugged into a training session like Lego pieces. Take the elements of your most effective training sessions that run well live and tag the session for easy plug and play. Eventually, a GarageBand experience will come to coaching. Hopefully, the experience is a pleasure, not a punishment.

These suggestions have helped me save time and allowed enough leeway to avoid making things too tight for adjustments.

Enhance Workflow, Don’t Encumber It

Anytime you add steps—whether primitive or high-tech—you increase the risk of mistakes and loss of time. Technology seems to kill more time than the DMV. My rage-inducing pet peeve is jump testing large groups with one testing device, regardless of the quality of data. I favor force plates, but due to the price tag and lack of training time I wonder why they are so beloved in strength and conditioning departments. Sometimes testing jumps can help, but it’s better to use the same money on outfitting a Velocity Based Training option to manage power training.

It’s better to see how training changes and make training the test rather than isolate to jump testing. The same goes for speed testing. Instead of doing combine options with one athlete at a time, simply just do a speed session and see how training improves over time. Only do absolute testing when needed.

Quiz, Test, Examine, Graduate

I like to use the rhythm of grade-school class evaluations for data collection: daily quiz, weekly test, quarterly exam, and career or annual graduation.

Daily – Subjective questionnaires, morning physiological testing, and weighing in should be done every day if possible.

Weekly – Some transient power test should be noted, as well as an aerobic session to ward off chronic fatigue patterns.

Quarterly – Biochemical and absolute testing are helpful to see cellular adaptions and raw athletic output. Keep the tests straightforward and leave excuses and room for interpretation to the pretenders. Enough classic sports science books on power and conditioning exist, so use only universal tried and true tests.

Annual – Write down PRs from the quarterly tests and create a scorecard for seasonal data. Each year development will show up, or if not at least explain what is holding the athlete back.

How does this approach relate to workflow? The biggest time-consumer is collecting data. Best practices involve having enough data to create clarity about what is happening, and data-driven means using enough data. On the other hand, data-driven can lead to “driving one crazy,” so test changes at the pace you expect improvement or need.

One final piece of advice: Measure what you do, don’t do things to measure them. Let the companies and sport scientists find better ways to extract information from training. Some tests are workouts while others express ability but don’t develop it. For example, a soccer player wanting to improve power can do vertical jumps every other day and make progress, but simple leg training will do more because of the overload. When you have to test, don’t compromise the integrity of the data by skipping steps or skimming on the science. Do the protocols right and accept that gathering some information takes time.

Integrate and Embed Sensors

The good technology integrates seamlessly and is embedded in the training process. The problem with good technology is that “embedded” doesn’t sell well. Nobody is seduced by the sleek and shiny more than me, but the best way to support workflow is to embed the technology more intelligently.

Take heart rate straps. One very smart soccer fitness coach explained his disdain for straps because players find them uncomfortable. Some companies have tried to create smart fabric solutions by making wearable tech shirts, but even those have an enclosure that is obtrusive and annoying. Also, smart fabrics break down quickly, making them expensive for most scholastic teams looking to do HR monitoring. In my opinion, you need three to clean and dry them at a rate enabling constant use. I suggest building your own if the companies are not collaborative.

Bar tracking (Velocity Based Training devices) now requires tablets to run effectively. So, teams, listen carefully or don’t say I didn’t warn you. Don’t use the mounting tools the companies suggest, as they have not experienced the wear and tear that coaches know all too well. Do everything custom and don’t mount the tablets in front of the platforms. I made the mistake of wanting athletes to be accountable. Now I just want them to focus on the right load and reps.

Some devices like the Bar Sensei require the user to wait for a reset period per rep, so those must be mounted in front. But as firmware and apps evolve, expect some passive acquisition protocols as companies constantly work on better user experiences. Since iPads and other tablets become caked with chalk dust and sweat from fingers (provided you train like a beast and not a kitten), use a stylus and attach it with a thin chain.

Share Data and Feedback More Intelligently

Building on the earlier tip, sharing data among team coaches and athletes is more of an art than a number-juggling exercise. Some of the wisest moves in the weight room require out-of-the-facility support options like athlete accounts to push video and other information.

With the GoPro and smartphones making video more easily acquired, the real struggle is editing and distribution. Like the custodial staff, video professionals must be treated like royalty. Most teams don’t have biomechanics experts and athletes’ need to consume film is steadily increasing. Sometimes a 5-second delay on a flat screen is great, other times keeping leaderboards in the locker room is a smarter idea. Olympic sports need more video review time; team sports need more efficient use of video.

I don’t do analysis as frequently as in the past; I just go deeper when testing. I like training footage to be trimmed and sent, so athletes have their own ability to slow down and scrub to areas they think give good information. Showing errors in real time should only be done with athletes who respond well to live visual review. I have said this multiple times: Slow-motion review can create temporal issues with motor skill acquisition.

Timing feedback or performance feedback increases output. Dr. Bryan Mann scolded the CVASPS attendees by reminding them that simply measuring and sharing data can create arousal and better training outcomes. Any effort-based testing and training should include some feedback. Remember, though, that feedback doesn’t need to be just bar speed—it can be simply knowing you are going harder. Use the continuum of feedback during heavy training and throttle down by muting the feedback during recovery or maintenance sessions.

Last but not least is the coming digital locker rooms we see with progressive AMS products making sharing smarter and making athletes want to share and collect data coaches want. Feedback is not just for athletes after lifts; it is also among athletes. The more the athletes understand and value the training process, the better the actual sessions will be. Each athlete having an account that collects personal data and shares information properly will change the sports world. Private sharing and mini-team communities will drive compliance when other culture issues seem to fail.

Learn How to Master Automation and Streamlining

Most coaches give up family time to help their second family. They spend a lot of time doing tedious jobs and tasks. Technology needs to work for us, yet I see few solutions that make my life easier. Most solutions are thinly disguised opportunities to access my eyeballs with added “features” (marketed parts of the software I don’t want or need) so they can brainwash my buying patterns. Great solutions cut time, remove routine work, and keep things error-free.

The solution to having technology work for you is automation. Creating procedures and routines that don’t require the coach at all is the secret. Being brilliantly lazy involves a lot of work upfront, but it pays off exponentially later. Let’s start with the basics.

• Simple account settings (administrative duties) – Email is a constant struggle. The problem is that even though it’s free and instant we still don’t do it right. Its purpose is to communicate succinctly and share calendars to talk and save time. I just don’t get why people don’t do more of this. Other options like meetings should be reduced to standing-room fast huddles. Some meetings kill the time needed actually to get work done. The ones that communicate what people are doing are best replaced with shared project management software or AMS Pipelines.
• API connections of smart devices (athlete data) – Smart devices have made us communicate less effectively and made us dumber on average. On the other hand, some users make more time for human interaction by using smartphones better. The solution is to spend less time pushing data and uploading it manually with API connections. Coaches need to coach, not babysit athletes. Specialty apps help athletes collect data and report information effectively. Many are free or dirt-cheap, making technology more of a tool rather than a burden.
• Communication scripts and algorithms (communication) – Texting, emailing, Tweeting, calling, video conferencing all increase noise and make it hard to communicate more effectively and efficiently. The simple solution is written rules of engagement that show each person how to contact, who to contact, and when to do it. For example, one sports medicine professional has an open calendar to schedule rehab sessions. Another therapist includes a sushi menu of manual treatments an athlete can request based on body charts. One great example of communication is messaging an athlete based on a metric on a dashboard that allows for alarm responses (injury) and fatigue adjustments in training.

To illustrate communication with athletes, many start inputting data when they wake up and share it live with the coach. One strength coach can get dozens of texts, emails, or survey updates a minute. The best way to fix this gridlock is to have procedures explicitly stated, so an athlete knows what to do when communication breaks down. What happens when a cell phone dies? What about illness?

The challenge now is creating a smarter and more streamlined communication network. Doing so requires a central cloud-sharing tool and expectations of what is an emergency. A coach should know where athletes are at all times without interfering with privacy. Sleep devices and recovery tools allow for lifestyle tracking, and those clever enough to adopt those practices will make the biggest impact in the future.

Wrapping up the Technology Tips

Without knowing the specifics of each organization or team, much of this article offers general advice. Budgets force coaches to be creative, and time constraints force them to be more efficient. I am not the best user of technology, as some coaches continually teach me a thing or two. But I do have a great eye for what is not a good approach. By addressing each area of technology need, coaches can fall in love with what got them into sports in the first place—the passion of working with people and helping them achieve goals.

These tips have helped me enjoy sports more and have proven to help coaches save time, remove headaches, and increase productivity. Athletes also see results because they are getting access to what they need, and administrators see their budgets worth the investment.

Please share so others may benefit.