Athletic Performance Academy – Latest news & updates from Athletic Performance Academy

Setting Standards for Athletes in Coaching Sessions

This blog is a bit of a change up in the usual sport science topics that I talk about.   Like many blogs before it, my inspiration has come from actual conversations with my coaches.  I have been talking with some of my team about the psychology of coaching and about the two qualities that I think world class coaches have  – and they are CONNECTION and STANDARDS.

 

A world class coach will be high on the level of connection they make with their athletes and also high on the level of standards they expect from themselves as the coach, and also the standards they expect of their athletes.

 

 

In today’s blog I’d like to focus more so on setting standards, but in reality they will be intertwined because I believe that setting high standards and holding athletes accountable is one of the key ways to establish trust and respect (build connection) and show them how much you care about their development.

Setting Goals

 

Before we get into the main discussion I wanted to set the scene for why this psychological work is so important. Prior to working with players at a deeper level I had generally ticked the ‘psychology box’ by setting goals with my athletes.

 

Most of the athletes I get to work with are generally labeled as ‘talented’ and are also known as ‘performance level’ rather than ‘developmental level.’ If you’re not familiar with this term it is a way to describe a group of athletes who are playing competitive sport- and train to win. They are usually more committed and play the sport several times a week. Developmental groups are a collective of athletes who usually play the sport less often and play for fun. Of course there will be an overlap but that is generally how it works.

 

This means often the goal they set related to some kind of ranking goal, or another outcome goal such as winning a particular tournament.

 

I used to get very frustrated because I was working with ‘talented’ athletes who set goals that I considered to be pretty high, and yet they would not put the work in that I thought was required of them.

 

There are two things to consider here. First of all, is the goal they set truly motivating to them and excites them (makes them feel something emotionally) or is it just a paper exercise that they have only committed to at a cerebral level.

 

The second thing to consider here is that they may be motivated by the outcome (to achieve a certain ranking goal etc) but perhaps they are not motivated by the process of what they need to do to achieve it. In this case they desire something but they are not committed. This is especially true in strength & conditioning. Sure there are athletes who love to be in the gym (and probably take confidence from it) whether that be because they like to feel strong, they want to improve how they look or maybe they have an injury history and they feel this helps them keep the pain away. But there are many that go into the gym because they have to – because it’s part of their weekly schedule, and they know they need to do it as a means to an end.

 

I hear it all the time, ‘my athlete doesn’t want it. He doesn’t want to put the work in. It’s not my job to motivate them. They should want to do it. ‘’

 

Until I got into coaching at a deeper level I would have tended to agree. I would have said they need to be motivated. I would have said that I only want to work with athletes who are motivated to do the work.

 

 

But let’s revisit what I said earlier. They desire something, but they are not committed……yet. We don’t know what we don’t know. I now see my job as a coach that has a trainer part and a teacher part. We need to teach our athletes why and how what we do in the gym helps them achieve their goal. Only by repeatedly making the connection between the gym and the sports field can you speak to their main motivation – their sport. We need to understand the principle of ‘Pace and Lead.’ We start at their pace and slowly lead them to higher levels of commitment that are more aligned with their goal. Of course if over a period of time they don’t align then we need to address whether the goal is appropriate.

 

One final point is that if they do have a goal that motivates them and they are very passionate about it – you also need to be careful to make sure this doesn’t anchor negative expectations that makes them fear the future and worry about not achieving it.

 

Goals are not about creating expectations. They are a way to direct effort towards improvement. Which means there is also the thought that you don’t need to set goals at all, as long as the athlete is continually committing to self-improvement and is making progress. This also applies to the coach. Perhaps you have very high expectations of the athlete, or yourself. This can create a negative environment because you don’t recognize any efforts towards improvement however small.

 

The same passion that makes the athlete say “I want it so bad” has to be managed so that they can handle the situation if they don’t get it. Expectations are the same things that create frustration in the moment when performing because you think you ‘should’ be performing better. It’s okay to have a certain level of expectation about what you want to do in terms of the processes you want to hold yourself accountable to but you have to be able to accept that processes and outcomes are not always cause and effect. Sometimes even if you do everything in your power you can’t control the result.

 

”If you do the best you can, you’ll never be criticised by me.”  Sven Goran Eriksson

 

So already you can see that the simple process of setting a goal can actually have a few more levels of complexity. This is why I am convinced that it is so important to better understand the psyche of your athletes. It is so easy to be swimming against the current and feeling resistance if the athlete’s behaviours are not aligned with your expectations and vice versa.

 

Setting Standards

 

As a coach I used to have expectations of my athlete’s abilities. Just like my athletes, I got caught up in the expectation of how well they should do (because they are talented).

 

I now personally try to keep an open mind. I see my role as a coach as ‘Nurturing nature,’ meaning I maximize whatever natural abilities someone has. I’ve been in the elite environment too long to put any energy into speculating whether someone will make it or not. Children that I have been convinced would ‘make it’ as a professional based on their incredible talent fell away and equally children that started off as a small, clumsy, heavy footed slow athlete grew into a tall, strong, powerful athlete who surpassed my expectations.

 

My expertise is partly built yes, on knowing what world class looks like, so I can cater for the talented athlete who wants to know what areas they need to work on to reach elite level. But for everyone regardless of talent, my role is about having the skills to appraise where they are now and create a challenging environment to take them further, one session at a time.

 

Not having expectations about where their future performance could reach is not the same as not having standards and objectives for the current session. But the standards relate to things that are within our control and based on personal levels of performance (what I can do) rather than outcome levels of performance (what the best can do). It is perfectly reasonable to have expectations about behaviour, effort and even personal standards of performance. We will discuss setting standards at the end of the blog.

 

My job as the coach is to help you meet certain standards of performance that we know you are capable of.

 

Ideally I want the athlete to measure their achievements against their own personal standards and how they achieve those standards.  My job as a coach is to give praise for effort towards their goals as well as feedback on how to improve their skills.

 

Influencing Pace of Change

 

At Gosling Tennis Academy they talk about ‘win now and win future.’ As a coach you have to look beyond the short term- is what the athlete doing now going to still help them win in the future?

 

Regardless of whether you are achieving success now or not there are always things to improve. The test is to see how willing someone is to keep making improvements. This is Peak Performance.

 

Peak performance is about focusing on the processes that enable you to achieve your human potential. For those operating in an elite performance environment (focus on the outcome of winning) then this same focus on the processes will also lead to the greatest chance of winning consistently.

 

Part of focusing on the process that leads to continual improvement may mean having to think about something for the first time or adopt a new technique etc. Therefore your job as a coach is to help them develop or ‘change’ their behaviours to help them get the specific outcome they want. This may involve changing how they think about, feel about and do something.

 

Despite an agreement on a shared goal you will experience a number of challenges to this way of thinking. You see, humans by their very nature dislike change, especially if it threatens their chance of success (perceived or otherwise). I think it was a quote from Brett Bartholomew’s book ‘Conscious coaching’ that my colleague Howard Green quoted: ‘Humans are different to other mammals in that more than attention they value recognition.’ For this reason, winning is such a strong driver of behaviour- because it gets a lot of recognition.

 

Logically speaking then it would make sense that those who are consistently under-performing ought to be the most open to change, and vice versa. But it is not quite as simple as this.

 

Quite often someone may be willing to make a change and will commit to the change in training but under the pressure of competition default to an old habit. They may want to make the change (desire/thought) but not be able do it in competition (behavior/action). This may be due to having a habit that comes out under competition pressure.

 

This attachment to what we know and do gets stronger the more that they do that thing. This is compounded when it has been associated with a period of success as it may lead to a belief that this behaviour leads to success. The reality might be that they are winning in spite of their approach.

 

Often negative emotions are a stronger driver of behavior than positive ones. So the negative emotion of fear (of failure or change) will be more important than the positive emotion of happiness (of future higher levels of success). Therefore braking habits takes a lot of time and energy with no guarantees of success.

 

So far I have already mentioned the word behaviours, beliefs and values so it makes sense to talk about Neurological level of change.

 

Neurological level of change

 

 

In our day-to-day life we are ‘behaving’ in a certain way. This is the outcome of our thoughts, feelings, cognitive processing and habits. Our behaviours are like the ‘results’ or outcome of the other layers. As a coach we may typically try to influence/change behavior by controlling the environment and/or instructing them on new skills. As you may have experienced, this may cause a temporary change but once they go into competition they default to their old behaviour. This is why understanding the layers of a person’s psyche are so important.

 

To truly bring about change you need to impact them at a deeper level.

 

The neurological levels are a concept (developed by Robert Dilts, and based on the work of Bertrand Russell and Gregory Bateson) that explain the level of influence on us (change) as a function of the depth of engagement of our psyche.

 

Greater change is always possible at deeper levels of our psyche, so for example a change in my identity (I am an international tennis player) would have a greater impact on my behaviour on the court than a change in my skills (how I play my backhand).

 

Understanding the impact of neurological levels also helps coaches to communicate with players, as you come to understand what is important to them at each level.

 

I think of this explanation of our psyche like an iceberg. The first three layers (Behaviours/Results, External environment, and Skill/Competencies) relate to externally verifiable and observable actions and are therefore easily seen by others. This is like the tip of the iceberg that floats above the water line. The fourth layer, beliefs, is a bridge to the remaining three layers, which are internal to us, and not easily observed by others. They may not express their beliefs explicitly but if you look just below the surface we are revealing our beliefs all the time in the things we say. ‘’I worked really hard in that match. I deserved to win.’’ This might reveal that the person believes that hard work should lead to success.

 

You would need to get to know someone really well to appreciate their deeper levels. This is like the part of the iceberg hidden below the water line, and like an iceberg it grows in size just as the level of impact on our actions increases the deeper that we go through the neurological levels.

 

This is why I said at the beginning that CONNECTIONS and STANDARDS are intertwined.  I believe that deeper the level of understanding you have of your athlete’s psyche (connection) the more successful you can be in helping them consistently perform at a high standard – because you know what drives them.

 

The level of impact on our actions increases the deeper we go through the neurological levels. Changes at the first three levels will require significant repetition for them to become a permanent change and in some cases it may never become permanent, which means the player is dependent on the coach to be reminded.

 

Peak performance players and coaches will be looking to make changes happen at the deepest level, since this gives the player the best chance of achieving their peak performance. It should enable the player to become self sufficient, since the changes are held at such a deep level of their psyche that they drive the appropriate skill acquisition and behaviours, therefore requiring less reinforcement by the coach.

 

Hold the smallest detail to the highest standard

 

Behaviours– we have already spoken about this. These are the physical things we see people do. The outcomes of all the deeper layers. We are always trying to get players to change what they do in order to influence performance. What stops a player doing what they need to? The degree of difficulty a player has in changing behaviour will be directly related to the neurological level at which they are connected to that behaviour. A coach can encourage a player to change their behaviour but if it is not considered important to them then the change won’t stick.

 

Environment– we live in a society bound by rules and procedures designed to guide our behaviours. Most of the ways society influences our behaviour is through punishment and reward. We are punished for breaking rules and rewarded for following them. However, the ability of external factors to consistently and permanently influence your action is very limited. I will clarify this point further because at first glance it may seem controversial.

 

I think of the environment we create as being like the flow of water that can influence [fish] behaviour.  But as much as we can ”influence” behaviour – if a salmon is set on doing things a certain way it can and will still go against the flow.

 

 

Fact – All salmon are born in rivers or streams and all of them return to the same river or stream they were born in to give birth to a new generation of salmon. As they can locate their specific natal spawning grounds, they have to swim upstream to get there.

 

As humans we fear change and like to conform to the masses. Therefore at a societal level we feel safe living in a world with a degree of predictability which gives us comfort. In this sense the environment does determine our behaviours at a societal level. In some ways elite sport plays into this societal pressure to conform. No one wants to get left behind so when the National governing body rewards talent by giving extra funding to the best players at each age group it causes a change in behaviour. Because money is something we all value, suddenly winning becomes so much more valued as it could lead to funding.

 

The flip side of reward is punishment. It could also be argued that certain coaching environments are effective in driving behaviour including the armed forces and even some well known sports academies and institutions. It could be argued that this is built on a basis of fear, and that the behaviour is carried out because the person fears the coach or the consequences of under-performing.

 

The success of the environment is predicated on the coach being there at all times to remind them. How many people do you know who have been caught speeding only to re-offend? Or who behave in a certain way when the coach is there but left to their own devices behave differently?

 

Neither of these environments are associated with peak performance. Peak performance players become self determined and begin to see how their internal world (in their mind and body) influences their performance in the external world. Any behaviour that is dependent on the coach or external factor to be present to drive behaviour is not peak performance.

 

As well as rules with consequences, as a sportsman or woman the main external factors relate to the people, places and things around you. This includes training centre, court surface, tennis balls, coach, practice partner, friends, parents etc. These are all external to the player and will have an influence on their performance.

 

The level of influence of external factors increase significantly as the player develops ‘’beliefs’’ in respect of their environment.  A player may say, ‘’I don’t play well with that person, or on grass or when my parents are watching etc’’ so they are giving you information in respect of the external environment (practice partner, court surface, parent) linked to a belief. Do they really not play well on grass or is it that they don’t like losing and they feel their performance is affected by the surface (which is a belief)?

 

Competencies/Skills– this is where coaches spend the majority of their time changing behaviours at the level of the skills. The higher the level of skills a player has the greater their chance of performing at higher levels. This may be mental, technical or physical skills. We have all come across situations where in competition the player doesn’t use the technique they have been practicing. The reasons these competencies/skills are not maintained, is down to the deeper neurological levels, which are likely to be blocking their progress.

 

I won’t go into further detail in this blog, but understand this.   If you spend all of your time trying to influence behaviour by trying to influence the environment and an athlete’s skills, you may fall short.  Because, unless you address the athlete’s deeper psyche you may not achieve any lasting shift in behaviour.  Think of the salmon in the earlier video.  Fundamentally, their purpose in life is to return to the same river or stream they were born in to give birth to a new generation of salmon.  That purpose is so deep in their psyche that even the tremendous flow of water pushing them in the opposite direction will not deter them from behaving a certain way.

 

Link it to something they value

 

I said earlier that it is perfectly reasonable to have expectations about behaviour, effort and even personal standards of performance.  I also said that the ability of external factors to consistently and permanently influence your action is very limited.  That being said, in a team setting the power of the tribe is strong – as humans we fear change and like to conform to the masses.  Humans like to fit in.

 

So while I think it is fine to set standards (which are built around having a set of rules, rewards and punishments for agreed behaviours) for me it is even more powerful when those behaviours are agreed and aligned with the VALUES that are important to the individual and team.

 

I’ll save it for another blog but if you can get the team to identify values such as we have at APA: Excellence, Respect, Courage, Competitive spirit and Enjoyment, you can relate their behaviours to the values.  For example, what behaviours would you expect someone to show who values excellence as a value?

 

Building Rapport

 

One of the downsides of dictating rules with rewards and punishments is that the children are not involved in the process.  Now clearly, as children they don’t have the same experience of the world as adults, they don’t know what they don’t know, and we need to guide them to the behaviours that are important!  But it is important to try and relate to them and build rapport.

 

So I try to build rapport with younger athletes by:

 

  • Talking with them at their level, both physically and developmentally, to convey respect.

 

  • Ask open-ended questions and listen to learn more about where youth are coming from and their backgrounds, interests, and feelings. “How did that make you feel?” “What was that like?

 

  • Watch for communication roadblocks such as lecturing, judging, and preaching to ensure that you keep doors open for dialogue

 

  • Participate alongside youth to show that you are interested and model risk-taking, competitive spirit, and enjoyment.

 

  • Support opportunities for youth input, shared responsibility, and leadership to help youth develop positive self-efficacy and essential life skills. “Your ideas on how we should approach this are important. What do you think we should do?” “How would you feel about leading the group meeting tomorrow?” “What do you think you could do to help?” “What do you think we could do to make it better?”

 

Customer Expectations

 

As a business owner I also think of how the athletes view my coaches and I as a professional company delivering a service.    Customer expectations are a set of behaviours or actions that individuals anticipate when interacting with a company. The customer’s expectations revolve around the quality of a service compared to the service’s cost/quality in the past, or in comparison to another service.

 

As customers they expect companies (such as mine) to understand their needs and expectations they have as an aspiring professional tennis player.  They expect us to be professional, passionate and positive (my 3 Ps of Coaching).  Customer satisfaction is therefore about meeting customers’ needs and is intrinsically linked to satisfaction with the product or service.  Put yourself in your customer’s shoes and treat customers how you would like to be treated yourself.  I then like to say to the athlete, now imagine that a coach came on court or in the gym, arrived late, didn’t have a plan, was always on their phone, didn’t give any encouragement or feedback.  How would that make you feel?

 


 

It is important to shine a mirror on their behaviours and see if they would be happy if their coach showed the same behaviour towards them in their session.

 

 

I ask my athletes to share the expectations of me as their coach and it is a useful exercise because they will talk about their ‘customer expectations.’  Invariably it comes back to values…..and asking for feedback is a great way to start developing honesty.  I’m asking them to be honest with me.

 

Honesty implies both truth-telling and responsible behaviour that seeks to abide by the rules. One may trust another person to behave honestly, but honesty is not identical to trustworthiness. A person may be honest but incompetent and so not worthy of trust (firm belief in the reliability, truth, or ability of someone or something).

 

Honesty builds trust.  By being honest, you get people to trust you more.

 

They want a connection with their coach, they want rapport.  Rapport is a relationship built by mutual understanding and trust. In fitness, rapport is the connection a fitness professional and a client or participant seek to establish during their time working together. Rapport involves forming a close connection with a person. It is an authentic expression of acceptance without personal bias (Rogers, 1995). Fitness professionals who create rapport with their clients help shape a relationship of mutual respect and honesty.  They want a coach who can connect with them and hold them accountable to high standards.

 

In a follow up blog I’ll go into more details about communication methods to build rapport and CONNECTION.

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 446

Episode 446 – Hailu Theodros – Improving change of direction ability, deceleration drills and coaching “transitional movements

Hailu Theodros

Background

 

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast is Athletic Development Coach at Speedworks, Hailu Theodros. Hailu spoke recently at the Sportsmith speed conference about gamespeed and his talk was incredible so to get him on the podcast was a complete no brainer.

 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Hailu here

 

Discussion topics:

 

”When it comes to deceleration and the assessment side, how would you go about assessing an athlete’s deceleration ability and where you need to spend your time?”

 

”Generally speaking when developing change of direction ability, the main things I am trying to understand is first and foremost from an applied setting, is what are we trying to prepare for, what are the type of change of directions (COD) occurring in the sport, and what I’m probably referring to more so, is the angles at which these decelerations take place. That’s where my head goes first, but if we are talking more generally about how well an athlete changes direction, the most important thing for me is how well do you brake (and all those KPIs that Damian Harper and others have done a really great job at demystifying, and secondly, how well do you project outside of your base of support.

 

What I mean by that is how well you brake in a 180 degree turn being the most extreme that you will probably experience from a braking standpoint, having to completely stop your velocity and re-accelerate in the opposite direction, and then those more shallow changes of direction, so 60 degrees and less, and looking how well you step outside of your base of support and re-orientating your trunk to move in a new direction.

 

I say it is a polarized approach because I think all of the change of direction angles in between those two angles are probably an amalgamation of those two aspects of how well do you brake and how well do you re-orientate your trunk.  So if we take a 90 degree cut which is smack bang in between 0 and 180 degrees, there is going to need to be some braking involved, but not needing to come to a complete halt, and there will also be a real need to step outside of your base of support.  So if I can understand the extremes and how well you operate in those, I feel I gain a good understanding of how well you will probably execute other angles of change of direction, and obviously there are some physical qualities underpinning those.  From an applied setting I would focus on the 180 and the more shallow COD and not test the 90 degree cut, so how well you are able to maintain your speed in the more shallow COD, and the more aggressive change of direction.  For me I have found it helpful to understand opposite ends of the spectrum to get a good gauge of your strategies of doing everything else in between.

 

Testing wise I use the 10-5 for COD and having more of a frontal plane camera.  For the more acute angles of COD I’d have a front on facing camera, looking at what happens in the sagittal plane, what does the trunk do, how wide is that touch down distance relative to the centre of mass, and this is obviously being in more of a pre-planned situation.”

 

”You put a really interesting post out, and a slowed down video of a 180-degree turn, and you were talking about how much time two comparative athletes were spending in the hole. And that brings me onto my next point which is folding vs. sitting in terms of what the athlete does and looks like in the change of direction.  Can you explain that a little bit for us?”

 

”The post was about some positive change that had taken place over the course of that intervention, and how we were able to improve that individual’s change of direction ability, by focusing on that deceleration more so, and the biggest take away point that came from that was actually helping teach that individual how to fold vs sitting.  What I’m talking about when I refer to that, is we know that during change of direction dropping centre of mass (COM) is a key KPI for braking, particularly how (well) does that individual execute the dropping of COM and commonly in the athletes I’ve coached there are those two ways of people doing that.  We have a fold, by flexing at trunk, hip, knee and ankle, and I would describe that as crumbling into flexion.  Or, are you able to remain fairly vertical and disciplined at the trunk and achieve more of that dropping of COM through predominantly hip, knee and ankle while the trunk remains fairly disciplined? Those are the two buckets I commonly fit people into.

 

 

If I go into the relevance of this, sitting allows for COM to be projected down and back and shifting towards that penultimate step, and probably facilitates using that penultimate foot contact a lot more, and from the research that others have done, there is a massive importance for a large amount of that braking to take place at penultimate foot contact, versus actually folding at the trunk and folding forwards to drop COM.  This definitely promotes COM to shift forward onto the front (leading) leg and actually doesn’t encourage sitting back and preparing for the new direction, and really create that nice stable base of support and counteract that forward momentum, and putting appropriate braking forces in the right direction.”

 

 

‘The importance of the trunk and the orientation of the trunk to decelerate and then re-accelerate is that something that is isolated in terms of a training capacity, or is that something that is a result of something else?”

 

”I don’t want to say it is one or the other, I think it can be an amalgamation of both.  It could be that individual’s capacity that is forcing a folding action – maybe they aren’t able to produce the right amount of (eccentric) forces at the lower limb in order to create the right amount of braking and therefore more of the body needs to be involved in that braking action, and counteract that forward momentum.  Or, actually that individual doesn’t have the confidence to increase that touch down distance.  In coaching deceleration, we feel that deceleration is the inverse of coaching acceleration so in acceleration we see:

 

  • hip height going from low to high
  • a decrease in touch down distance to increase our propulsive forces

 

So when things get confusing, how can I understand it better, and actually the folding action doesn’t support our ability to increase touch down distance, doesn’t support our ability to redirect our COM in the new direction.  When we look at sitting, it definitely does support that a lot more, as a result of dropping COM (hip height) effectively whilst increasing touch down distance and actually having a negative displacement across the steps, as opposed to what we see in acceleration which is a positive hip displacement across the steps.”

 

”Would you be able to take us through what you’re actually looking for when that athlete starts to decelerate, and and then look at some drills to be able to coach them into these positions?”

 

”Going back to some of Damian [Harper’s] work, I’m predominantly looking at the anti-penultimate, penultimate and final foot contact.  We start from the anti-penultimate, and we use this phase of projecting back, and is that individual able to increase their touch down distance and have the confidence to increase it,  get their foot out in front of them and project themselves backwards in order to counteract the forward momentum that we get from acceleration, or linear speed.   And then progressively over those steps, as much as we are projecting backwards, are we also able to drop our COM?   The importance of dropping the COM is so that we can apply those braking forces more horizontally in the opposite direction and it’s really, really challenging to stay very vertical and increase touch down distance from an anatomical standpoint.  And again, I’ll refer back to acceleration, it’s very hard to project forward when you are in a very upright position.

 

So across the anti-penultimate and penultimate step are they able to increasingly step in front of their base of support and be fairly upright in their trunk whilst dropping their COM?  That can be a little bit tricky to see, but again it is this sitting action, almost sitting on the toilet is a good way to describe it; we wouldn’t flex at our trunk in order to sit on the toilet, we stay fairly vertical.  So we are sitting into our hips, dropping into our hips, and when we get close to that final foot contact we are hoping that a large part of our braking has been done in the anti-penultimate and penultimate contact, and the final foot contact is really to create a final block to decrease our forward momentum before helping us to project forward into the new direction.  We are looking that in that position the orientation should be of the trunk but also the shin in that final foot contact directing towards the new direction, but also the ranges of motion that that individual goes into should be fairly shallow, on the final foot contact providing that they have done sufficient work in the proceeding steps.

 

Getting out of the hole and how long you take to get in and out of the hole, and if you spend too long in the hole, it is probably a lot of the time, because you haven’t done enough [braking] in the previous steps and your final foot contact is working extremely hard, not only to brake but also to re-accelerate.  I see those preceding steps as helping your final foot contact out.  Can we help ourselves out by doing more work in the earlier steps?  Final foot contact has a larger emphasis on projecting out into the new direction, than it does slowing momentum down.

Foot positioning

 

If the foot isn’t beginning to reposition towards the new direction at the penultimate step it is extremely hard to create the right braking forces, to block against forward momentum, when feet are facing forward towards the initial direction we come into.  Not only does that rotation of the foot need to happen at the penultimate step to redirect, I also think it needs to create a real block to go against momentum of the initial acceleration direction, so it almost has two roles.

 

By the time the final foot contact takes place, half of the work [of braking] should be done, if not more of the work should be done, in order to redirect.

 

There is just a slight change of orientation of the trunk in the transverse plane, but we shouldn’t have to spend more time having to take another step in order to redirect.  You commonly see this with players doing a 180 degree COD, they struggle to stay within a corridor of COD, and what I mean by that is that they come in and really curve their re-acceleration, because either they haven’t prepared well enough for the new direction, or, they need to take more steps in order to brake and decelerate their horizontal momentum.”

 

”When you’re coaching deceleration in this capacity, like we’ve discussed, is this always done in a 180 COD, and would you always do this from a max speed perspective, because often in team sports when you’re making a COD you’re not particularly going fast.  If you’re a defender, for example, you’re jogging and then a quick deceleration and COD, so I’m just wondering how you incorporate the demands of the sport and the position with the coaching of it ?”

 

”For me, I think braking as a quality, that is going to happen at the extremes of the CODs, and if I really want to overload that, I might use that [180 COD] as an intervention.  But definitely I agree with you (and especially when we come onto talk about our Speedworks levels) it needs to be more representative of what we are trying to train for.  Yes, braking might be your limiting factor, as to why you can’t stay tight in a 1 vs 1, or you struggle to change direction.  So I might use a 180 COD to really overload that stimulus, but I definitely need to shift our training along to make it more representative of what we are trying to train for, specific to the velocities and angles of COD that take place, but I don’t necessarily think that it always needs to be a sprint into change of direction.

 

Some of the ways in which we have coached it. have been based on applying a well understood and applied framework for acceleration so there is going to be some:

 

  • Isolated exercises – that focus on key moments of the penultimate contact or final foot contact, or trunk orientation.
  • Integrated drills – exposing the athlete to different CODs, coming in at different speeds, different types of derivatives- which are transitional movements in themselves, such as lateral shuffle, cross-over and backpedals, where there is still an element of braking involved. These allow you to focus on key shapes and positions at lower intensities and lower speeds.

 

We can also do two to three decelerations from walking and jogging positions that are accentuated from a band, pulling that individual further into the direction they are initially heading in.  We can not just decelerate to stop, but decelerate to move off again.  We can decelerate off larger distances, shorter distances, there is a real wide spectrum, it’s just important to understand the context of what we are working in, and breaking it down before we build it back up again.

 

”Before we go any further, would you be able to talk us through the speedworks levels, as I know it is something that was mentioned at the conference a couple of times?”

 

”Specific to this context around deceleration, Gamespeed goes from Level 1 to Level 7 and increases in complexity, and gets closer and closer to what we understand as Gamespeed.

 

Level 1 is very much about isolated drills and the development of an attribute whether that is acceleration, or deceleration in this context, and the 180 COD provides that real challenging stimulus for braking as we have discussed.  Level 1 is a really great place to embed some key concepts, that we need the individual to really understand about braking, such as sitting vs folding,  which is going to be a key thing we want that individual to understand in level 1.  That will be a continuous theme as we complexify things and make things more reactive (in higher levels), and the challenge is going to be see if that individual can still achieve the fundamentals, with less time at levels 3, 4 and 5.

 

Then as we move into level 2 it is about adding complexity by adding different variables in, challenging velocity, different directions, different positions, so not just from cone to cone as such. So now it’s not just a 180 COD to a cone where you stop when you reach there, and then come back. It might be applying different angles so you’re doing a zig zag potentially and you’re decelerating to the first cone before decelerating out, or you are starting in different positions before you decelerate, or you are in a specific zone before you decelerate.

 

When we move into level 3 the practice designs are more representative of the end goal, or what happens in the game, but in a closed setting.

 

These are the situations, these are the actions that take place, how well can you demonstrate braking when you have plenty of time to focus on it?  And again, as we begin to complexify these things a bit more we can make them a bit more reactive as we move through the levels.  We can make things a bit  more reactive by using me as a coach, and calling different cones/colours, and reduce the time available to prepare.

 

Levels 4 and 5 are going to be about creating more situations and for me the coaching needs to shift towards more the objectives of the task and the task we are trying to represent from the game, as opposed to what the movement should look like.  Ideally yes, the movements (performed well) should equal achieving the task better and be more successful at the task.  But I think what gamespeed allows us to do, is appreciate that even though there are core fundamentals there is a large amount of variability that will take place when we spend more time at levels 4 and 5 and things are more reactive, and open.  That variability is important because it is more representative of what happens in the game, there is no situation that happens in the game.   So how can we artificially create this environment that creates that?

 

Your objective in that situation was to get tight to your opponent, and you didn’t, and that was probably because you didn’t sit enough or you were folding and you were still in your final foot contact versus shifting towards your penultimate foot contact, and that is why maybe you weren’t as successful at the task.”

 

”Are there certain types of drills that you could share that you use when you are trying to develop these deceleration qualities that we are speaking about?”

 

”I think first of all, especially when we are going back to this point of spending too long in the hole, it is important to highlight that it is important to understand what the limiting factor is to spending too long in the hole.  Is it a physical restriction? Is it a physical capacity limitation? Or is it more of a movement strategy?  Be it that you yield too much or you go into very deep ranges of motion on that final foot contact, and you don’t have those reactive strength qualities to be quick out of the hole.  Or is it that your trunk is all over the place, throughout those deceleration steps and your final foot contact?  So highlighting ‘it’ first of all is very important, and to understand that there are differences and what is the cause and effect of spending too long in the hole.  Once you identify that you can go after it.

 

Using the original example earlier, that individual’s focus was actually around better trunk orientation in shallower ranges of motion and expressing more reactive strength in that final foot contact.  So a lot of the drills that we went to were:

 

  • things that happened out on the pitchhop & returns – plyometric variations
  • things that happened in the gym – focused on overloading the physical elements (which was a smaller portion of the training for this individual), while still integrating a teaching component.  So there was a lot more supra-maximal work eccentric, isoinertial flywheel work to really challenge the eccentric rate of force development (RFD).  It was highlighted that this was a contributing factor to spending too long in the hole, not being able to create those high forces quick enough, which is probably why the trunk was getting involved.

 

While in the gym doing that eccentric and isoinertial work, it was 100% reinforcing that message that I need you to sit, not fold, to remain vertical through your trunk, to remain disciplined in your trunk while executing these exercises, sitting through our hips and knees as opposed to through our trunk.

 

Then we went out to the on field work, which was a larger portion of it, the work was focused around hop & return in the frontal plane (lateral hop & return), but accentuated the eccentric component by using a band to pull that athlete further into flexion, and the athlete has to do his best to resist against this added velocity and accentuated action.  We did a lot of lateral shuffles but with the stick overhead to really challenge that individual’s ability to sit and not fold, when doing a repeated shuffle, when reaching those end points.  Can you stay in fairly upright positions when moving off each side when moving left and right.  Finally, a lot of that work was plyometric work in the frontal plane such as skater jumps, really reinforcing that point of bigger touch down distance, shallower ranges of motion, really reactive contacts and working along that spectrum, much like we would do with acceleration.

 

The biggest difference was talking about those technical points that crossover to what we are trying to achieve in the actual movement itself, and almost having these two components – teaching and training always in tandum.  In the gym, adaptations taking a greater emphasis from a physiological standpoint and then equally out on the pitch, using velocity, and doing slow and fast movements to overload the technical and physical side.

 

One of the reasons why I like lateral shuffles and the importance of them, is that doing deceleration work (specifically 180 CODs) can be quite intense and really challenging to overload them, both from a physical capacity, or their ability to cope with those loads but also the time available to embed those teaching points.  So the lateral shuffle was a great opportunity to still have some braking opportunity at lower velocities in positions that were really specific to what we want to see when we are doing deceleration in a 180 COD.  So the lateral shuffle allowed us to have a lower hip height to start with which is what we want, and can we teach that individual to increase that touch down distance from a position of hip height that is already low, and the stick overhead keeps you accountable to having trunk discipline and keeping fairly upright.  it’s a very good feedback tool to see whether you have trunk flexion involvement.”

 

”Let’s talk about transitional movements, I’d just like to hear more about what you see as transitional movements.  As a defender in football, I was rubbish at them, so I’d like you to talk more about them.  From your perspective, what are transitional movements?”

 

”I almost coin them the connectors between linear speed, braking and COD.  It is the actions that take place between those movements.  I think one thing that has been really pertinent for me and diving into this more and more, and that work started at my time at Chelsea FC, is a lot of that work was triggered by the football coaches.  The background to that is that the coaches would come to me and say, ”he doesn’t move his feet very well, or he can’t change direction very well. But when we as a department looked at how we assessed those aspects, they were more traditional in terms of the 180 degree COD 10-5 test, or we would understand it in terms of a 90 degree cut, and they just weren’t crossing over with what the coaches were talking about.  How we were assessing an athlete’s ability to change direction weren’t aligning and actually that pushed me a bit more to realise that there was more to it than just change of direction.

 

I think the reason why those transition movements are important is really because of the technical and tactical constraints of the sport.  I think if you remove those aspects of the sport, I think linear speed, braking and COD are good enough, they tick the box.  If we look at a sport like volleyball, there is a real need to keep your trunk facing the net while changing direction, and that is a tactical component of the sport, which then means that a lateral shuffle is going to be really important before you accelerate in order to keep yourself facing forwards.  Or, if we are talking about a defender in football, there is a real need for him to stay facing the attacker, if he is running at him in a 1 vs 1, which is why a back pedal becomes important; if it wasn’t, then that individual would just turn and run, and it doesn’t need to be any more complex than that.  So, I think it’s the presence of the technical and tactical constraints that highlights the need and importance of the transitional movements, that connect between linear speed, braking and COD.

 

The objectives of these transitional movements fall into three buckets for me:

 

  1. minimising speed loss when someone is changing direction or reorientation is needed – so for me that looks like someone going from a backpedal into a linear sprint.  You’re still moving in the same direction, going backwards but I’m just changing my orientation.  It doesn’t really fit into COD traditionally.  So the requirements of that situation are how can I get into my backpedal and linear sprint without losing too much speed to keep my speed increasing, because I have a player running at me, for example.
  2. close or exploit space over small distances when change of directions are less effective – so similar to that volleyball situation, where a traditional COD like a 90-degree cut are less effective, and a lateral shuffle is going to be really important to close and exploit space.
  3. preparing for and accessing positions a lot quicker – if I can do a rotational step (drop step) providing that I am doing that effectively, I should be able to access key positions, have my hip height at the right place, decrease my touchdown distance and accelerate faster, when we are talking about linear speed.

 

Although I have categorized transition movements into four categories (lateral shuffle, rotational step (drop step), cross-over step and the back pedal) and it has been helpful for me to dissect and separate those movements into those four categories, one thing I have always been quick to check myself on is that I don’t train movement in just those isolated ways because when we work it back from the sport which is where they are highlighted, these actions do not happen in isolation.  It isn’t just a lateral shuffle, it isn’t just a backpedal.  It is commonly a back pedal into a lateral shuffle into an acceleration, or a deceleration into a drop step, into a re-acceleration.  So for our understanding it is helpful to separate them into these areas, but when we go about training it is important to think about how these transitional actions present themselves in sport, and why, because there is probably going to be a need to mix and merge these movements whilst developing them.

 

It’s helpful to refer back to the levels in the Speedworks gamespeed framework, yes the four movement categories allow us a place to start to work on these categories in isolation.  There is merit and value in understanding how well you backpedal just to backpedal (in isolation), because we know that when we combine these actions and look at the sport, backpedaling is a key component, for example.  But we need to quickly understand that we need to move on to tasks that make things more representative of the game demands as we work through the levels and get closer to game speed.

 

It is not one movement solution for a situation. What is the objective of the task, and what is the most effective solution to achieve that?  It is dependent on the technical, tactical and physical components that are involved in that situation, and not just this is the solution for the situation and I am going to use it.

 

”How do you then dissect things and then focus on that one transition movement, or perhaps you don’t, it’s more of a holistic view of things and it plays into lots of manipulation of these kinds of movements like we have just said?”

 

”Let’s take the situation of the central defender coming out to close down a striker who is then looking to run past them as coaches will commonly highlight defenders, as not moving well enough.

 

I’d definitely start by saying, ”what is the situation that you struggle in?” and for me that is definitely on the coach, definitely on the analyst (if you have those resources available) or perhaps my own understanding of the sport, and taking that real situation that is affecting performance.  So maybe you’re not winning your 1 vs 1 battles or players are beating you too easily.  That’s a real incentive to say, okay, we need to work on this,  let’s highlight the situation you are struggling with and then dissect it – what are the speeds you are running at? What are the actions that are taking place? And what are the distances you are working in?

 

First of all I’m thinking, ”ok you clearly need to backpedal at quite a high speed as you need to keep facing the opponent, and then at some point you need to turn.  Which aspect is it that you struggle with? Is it actually that you have a real loss of balance because you can’t backpedal effectively and that trickles into your turn and makes it look messy? Or actually is it you can backpedal really quick, but the moment I’ve asked you to do a rotational drop step, in order to turn and accelerate, maybe that is where yo have a loss of balance or a real drop in velocity, which works to the advantage of the attacker.

 

So highlight those points first of all, and then for me it’s about what are the key skills that take place in that moment?  If it is the first portion of the backpedal then let’s isolate that, let’s overload it in different ways.  Let’s see how well you backpedal across a 10m stretch.  This is where the Project-Switch-Reactivity (PSR) Speedworks framework has been great for me because it works across many different aspects and it’s not just applied to linear speed.

 

So in that backpedal, can you project your COM in the right direction, can you switch your limbs to stay in control of your COM and can you be reactive on the floor? So, those are the things I would be looking at, and actually the bigger guys, you will probably see some strategies where they don’t really project themselves very far, they stay very tall and take loads and loads of steps but don’t travel anywhere!  And actually, COM begins to topple over and the top half goes beyond their bottom half and lose their balance and maybe fall on their bum! In those situations there is merit and value in saying, I need to teach you how to backpedal better, so I need to teach you how to drop your COM better and project better, because you’re really good at switching but you’re just not getting anywhere.

 

From then on, I’m just going to use different types of techniques (differential learning) to play with direction, play with speed, to challenge the depth of situations with which you can execute this movement skill in various different ways because there is high variability when you go back to your sport.  So how can I challenge it and stress test it before we go down the levels of 2, 3 and 4 of the gamespeed model, to make it more situation specific?”

 

Top 5 Take Away Points:

 

  1. COD is about how well do you brake and how well do you project outside of your base of support.
  2. Benefit of a polarized approach – helpful to understand opposite ends of the spectrum to get a good gauge of your strategies of doing everything else in between.
  3. Importance of a key teaching cue – sitting versus folding as you get in and out of the hole.
  4. Important role of anti and penultimate steps – a large part of our braking has been done in the anti-penultimate and penultimate contact, and the final foot contact is really to create a final block to decrease our forward momentum before helping us to project forward into the new direction
  5.  Importance of transitional movements to gamespeed – lateral shuffle, drop steps, cross-over and backpedal.

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

You may also like from PPP:

 

 

Episode 443 Nick Kane

Episode 442 Damian, Mark & Ted

Episode 444 Jermaine McCubbine

Episode 436 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 381 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 379 Jose Fernandez

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 370 Molly Binetti

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 436

Episode 436 – Jonas Dodoo – How to use the warm up as a movement screen and revolutionising technique analysis with computer vision and AI

Jonas Dodoo

Background

 

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast, Rob is speaking to speed coach legend and Head Coach at Speedworks, Jonas Dodoo. Jonas has been on the podcast multiple times and each time he appears, its obvious why. Jonas is here to talk about the Speedworks philosophy of projection, reactivity and switching but also the warm up as a movement screen and sprint technology.

 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Jonas here

 

Discussion topics:

 

”Can you give us an overview of Projection, Switching and Reactivity?”

 

Projection

 

  • It’s about range of motion between thighs at toe off when you have finished pushing off the ground to separate your thighs and push back into the ground to throw your momentum forward
  • Trunk discipline – the ability to have a big hip extension without having to overuse your back erectors
  • “Bum before back” – using your butt.
  • It’s about displacement, it’s linked to your strength to weight ratio and about separation of thighs and using your bum
  • Once you project and make a big shape to throw yourself forward you need to exchange your limbs and reverse the action that you’ve just done. Hip extension –> Hip flexion (if your extension is driven by your bum, not your lumbar or quad/ knee)
  • Not knee extension–> knee flexion, which would happen if you don’t have good co-contraction of the posterior chain.

 

Drive a good projection pattern that is bum driven which makes it really easy to switch and reverse your thighs really easily and cleanly.

 

If you are knee driven you are doing lots of shin roll and ankle collapse in order to find more tension on the ground. So your hip flexors become really quiet and therefore they are not ready when you start to run faster.

 

Switching

 

  • Switching is really about the coordination of the pelvis so that you can hit a hip lock and bounce out of that position.

 

Reactivity

 

  • Reactivity is like the suspension it’s like the recycling part of this action and it is highly linked to your efficiency.

 

You could have a really good projection and switch, but when your foot hits the ground you collapse, you lose all your energy and now have to shin roll and knee push; you still get stuck in that scenario of not being efficient, not being elastic.

 

Projection, Switching and Reactivity are my key attractors that when they work together you become very efficient in what you’re doing.

 

Most of the movement puzzles that are related to injury are around the fact that one or two of those things are an athlete’s strength and the third one is a weakness.

 

They may not be getting an injury in the calf and ankle. But they will get them in their groin and hamstring and that comes from the fact that they can’t be stiff and stable on the ground and the cascade of issues that come from it.

 

Projection– I’d measure hip displacement. How far have you traveled? Step length

 

Switching– is about reversal of thighs. I’d measure thigh angular acceleration and thigh angular velocity. Velocity being the range and in what time, and Acceleration being the ability to reverse it at the end of those ranges.

 

Reactivity – is all about all about GCT and ankle stiffness and all round body system stiffness. It’s highly related to Switching. We have plenty of players who have the highest RSI in the gym but when they run they have the worst reactivity and they spend lots of time on the ground because the foot isn’t moving back and down, maybe its just down or maybe its even out in front and it’s blocking.

 

Over the last 3 years we have studied runs, we’ve got over 1000 runs, 300-400 players. We do a deep analysis and it always comes back to being able to do one of those three things (PSR).

 

 

‘Can you give give us a bit of an insight into where your head goes in terms of implementing something to improve each one of those three (projection, switching and reactivity)?”

 

”I think it’s actually relatively simple.  Can you make a big shape? So when you watch someone run right now, and you do need a bit of a coaching eye, or an awareness at least, of your population.  So if you know your population and you have a normal distribution, a few of your guys will run with more step length, so bigger strides, almost bounding.  Some of your guys will run with more step frequency, just spinning the wheels.  Some of your guys frequency will come from limiting air time, not wasting any time on the ground, and that’s why they don’t have as much displacement.  (Or) They might be on the ground an average amount of time, just like some of the other guys, it’s just they don’t spend any time in the air, and that’s why they spin fast.   Others may spin fast because they are very quick off the ground.  These guys are being more efficient through the floor, being more reactive, maybe limiting their range on the ground as well.

 

So if you watch your player and they have got big steps, but because they take big steps maybe they don’t reverse very quickly out of those steps; maybe they really utilise all of that time to extend.  Those are the individuals that could benefit from as soon as they get to the end (of hip extension), switching a bit sooner, because just by adding a bit of switching and reversal they can attack the ground a bit sooner.  They ‘may’ lose a tiny bit of length, but what they gain in rate of force development (RFD), in quickness on the ground, is what improves them and allows them to run a bit faster.

 

Being step length dominant or developing step length as a goal is good and is part of the equation of velocity (distance x time), however if you reduce your step length a tiny bit and increase the frequency, especially the reversal and the ankle stiffness you become efficient, let’s forget faster, you just become more efficient.  You can run longer for the same amount of energy, you can repeat sprint, as you transition the later part of a run is less costly.

Projection

 

Making a big shape and pushing against resistance, creating good ankle and shin discipline are the KPIs of projection.  So a broad jump encourages you to push against the ground horizontally, make a big extension (not a big shape) but a big extension against the ground to get a big projection.  A single leg broad jump, or a bound, where time is not your KPI but distance is, will support projection.

 

At a general level so would building a bigger bum, a bit of hypertrophy around your proximal hamstring, even a squat, and stronger quadriceps.  Most of your compound lifts will address your ability to project yourself.  Most compound lifts are vertical, they are slow compared to running, so the transfer is limited but if you are weak and do a bit of compound lifting and get stronger your RFD improves automatically and your force capability (your strength to weight ratio) improves so 50% of what you need to project yourself well in a sprint is covered by just getting a bit stronger.

 

Now, getting a bit stronger after that doesn’t cover much more, so after that point and you have some strength (I would do it concurrently) I would be developing some strength and physical capabilities to use your hip extensors aggressively and stabilise that with your hip flexors and trunk.  Then I would do various transference drills – special strength – be it sled, be it wall drills with a specific focus, some key switching elements where projection is limiting you, or you are stressing projection even though you are switching.  Resistance during some of those key exercises, resisting hips in extension, or challenging your trunk while you are still trying to extend are all the key exercises that would really support projection.  But at the end of the day, you need to do it running!

 

 

So at football clubs (and team sports) we do spend time helping them design micro doses of how to address projection, switching and reactivity through exercises in warm-ups, in the gym, post training on the grass, mid way through technical drills so that they potentiate the technical and tactical aspects.  There are various ways of doing it but at the end of the day it is ‘can you push yourself forwards fast?’, that’s really what we are talking about.  That’s just projection!

 

Switching

 

Maybe I’ll quickly talk about switching.  So it’s about lumbar pelvic control so anything that is core related, anything where you have to be in a split stance and exchange your limbs out of a split stance or be in a split stance and have to be stable and strong and create lots of force closure around your pelvis.  Anything that encourages you to dissociate your pelvis from your trunk, from your leg, being able to rotate, being able to flex/extend, but keep everything in control.  Use your obliques like an elastic sling, use your hip flexors like a sling; anything that encourages that is going to support your ability to switch, or at least support the stability required in order for you to switch.

 

 

Anything that is high RFD at outer ranges of your limb, and having to eccentrically control (some people say it is isometrically- I’m not in that debate!) being able to block your knee on the way up and stop it moving up quickly, using your adductor magnus and your glute, and reverse it back down, that is switching.   Or extending your hip, and before it’s finished its extension, initiate your hip flexors to rip it forwards, there are some high eccentric forces happening proximal to the joint, at both of those joint positions, and both of those things support your ability to switch.  I do think that you need the physical strength, the core strength but that is almost slow strength and you need to be able to do it at high intensities and add some pertubations, and with those pertubations, still be able to switch your limbs!

 

Reactivity

 

I think that all plyometrics can help support your ability to be reactive.  I think calf training and calf loading is only done in most team sports when people are injured, and there is a massive under appreciation of how a sloppy, soft, unstable ankle can create a cascade of issues up the chain.

 

 

Switching activities will also help, because when you are switching and landing on the ground, they actually get your contacts needed to create the RFD and the stiffness at the ankle, alongside running drills, along side plyometrics.  They are all going to be great ways of adding system stiffness.”

 

‘When we talk about using the warm up as a movement screen, from a tech free perspective, and just using your coaching eye, how can you help coaches to zone in on certain things that may help them moving forwards?”

 

”I’m just going to regurgitate and just repeat what I just said, if I’m honest.  I definitely think that PSR is a easy way to bucket the KPIs of movement.  So let’s say you’re just doing a general warm up.  There is:

 

  • walking activities
  • mobility on the ground or over hurdles
  • locomotive activities – be it drills, lateral shuffles

 

Trunk control

 

So already you are doing a range of drills, so having an awareness of your group and asking basic questions like firstly, ”do they have good trunk control?, does their trunk sway forwards and backwards, are they stuck in a bit of lordotic anterior tilt and it remains that way?  Anterior tilt is important for extension but you should be able to get it and come out of it.  Or does it stay there all the time and they have a curve in their back, and they look like they’ve got a bit of a pot belly but really it’s because they open their diaphragm and they can’t set it.  Trunk control is a massive precursor to stability and fluid movement.  Lack of trunk control has been linked to ACLs, and groins and hamstrings and everything right? So, the first thing I’m looking for is trunk control.  Looking side on at something like A skips, I’m looking at their head and seeing if they can keep their head just in front of their hips, rather than just behind because that difference is pretty dramatic in terms of what they are doing with their pelvis, and driving hip extension.

 

So small things around trunk control and its influence on your hip extension quality would be my constant theme, so why put sticks above head and why spend time on the ground doing hip bridges and trunk related activities? It’s so that I can get some co-contractions.  Before we sprint (especially my rehabers) I do an aggressive set of med ball throws (kneeling, above their head, sitting with their feet off the ground and having to rotate) because I just want to turn on their ability to aggressively co-contract and deal with rotation quickly and get out of it.  I don’t think that anti-rotation is something that we coach, or that we should coach and people coach it a lot.  I want to see them go into rotation and then get out of it. I want them to access the edges, and get out of the edges aggressively.

 

So if I’m watching a warm-up I’m using a range of activities to encourage their ability to stabilise their trunk, dissociate hip extension and hip rotation around it.  If I see lots of sway backwards and forwards, it’s an issue.

 

Plyometrics

 

If I’m doing basic low level plyometrics such as pogos, I’m looking to see, ”are you falling or are you flying?”  This is something I have been talking a lot more over the last 8 months just because I’ve been in a lot of Academies and I need to coach it but I didn’t want to waste too much time, and actually it’s the two key things I focus on.

 

If you are falling you never get your toes up, you never attack the ground, you always amortise and squash your body into the ground, you always over rotate to go forwards.  If you are flying, you get your legs ready in the air, you jump before you land.  Before you land you actually initiate extension so as a result, your knees don’t bend as much, and your ankles don’t collapse.  You load your elastic structures to get off the ground and you get more air time.  Every player who does this will say it feels easier, I feel more efficient, it doesn’t hurt my knees.  So as I’m going through a warm-up I’m making sure they are being bouncy and creating pre-tension across all of their plyos, their side skips, backwards runs etc to make sure they are flying and not falling.

 

Switching

 

Then switch, everyone does boom booms or A skips, or whatever exercise it is, but not everyone switches out of their marches, so that’s the first thing.  I want to make sure that you don’t just make a big shape and then your foot falls.  I want to make sure that you make a big shape and you can reflexively exchange your legs.  When people do boom booms, sometimes they have big range, and let’s say they’re doing three booms, and they are going ”boom, boom, boom.”

 

 

But what you often see is, small, small, BIG!  They sacrifice range of motion for speed, and all you are doing is staying in gear 2 and not really doing anything with it.  The aim of projection is about range, so can you project and spend little time doing it.

 

Mathematicians will have taught us that in order to get faster you can’t increase step length and step frequency, is the general adage.  I think it is BS, because if you attack the ground and have stiffness and pre-tension it allows to be quicker off the ground but it also allows you to get good projection, especially if you have enough air time.  You can improve both!  It’s just about how you go about it, and the discipline that is needed for it.

 

This isn’t just in linear sprinting, if you were doing a change of direction drill, the same things would apply.  So what we do, is we go PSR for sprinting.  Now let’s talk about it in terms of a change of direction or a cut or just slamming on the brakes.  And Hailu Theodros has been great at taking those concepts and saying okay, how am I going to apply this to change of direction, but more importantly with his clients in the English Premier League (EPL), how do I make this position specific, so I can continue to layer in good movements and get it to transfer very, very quickly as well?”

 

Top 5 Take Away Points:

  1. Projection – It’s about range of motion between thighs at toe off when you have finished pushing off the ground to separate your thighs and push back into the ground to throw your momentum forward
  2. Switching – is really about the coordination of the pelvis so that you can hit a hip lock and bounce out of that position
  3. Reactivity – is like the suspension it’s like the recycling part of this action and it is highly linked to your efficiency
  4.  Step length and step frequency can both be trained!
  5.  PSR don’t just apply to linear sprinting.  They apply to all movement/

 

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

 

You may also like from PPP:

 

Episode 444 Jermaine McCubbine

Episode 443 Nick Kane

Episode 442 Damian, Mark & Ted

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 381 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 379 Jose Fernandez

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 370 Molly Binetti

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Paid Internship with APA

Dear coach,

 

This year has been a blast and we have had a great time welcoming five coaches on our 2022-23 internship/studentship programme based at Gosling Tennis Academy.

 

 

The next APA Paid Internship programme for 2023-24 is now OPEN!

 

Click the link HERE to find out more…

 

To apply, please send a CV and cover letter to: daz@apacoaching.co.uk

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 443

Episode 443 – Nick Kane – Managing hip and groin injuries and developing a robust injury prevention strategy 

Nick Kane

Background

 

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast, Head Physio at Essendon Football Club, Nick Kane talks to Rob about how to rehabilitate groin injuries and how to set up an injury prevention system in team sports.

 

Not only is Nick the Head Physio at an AFL club but he runs his own practice and is founder of the Sports Map Network, a resource that educates physios through multiple mediums.

 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Nick here

 

Discussion topics:

‘As a general global approach when it comes to returning an athlete who has suffered persistent groin injuries rather than the one off, what is your general approach when it comes to groin injuries?”

 

”I think it’s a well rounded question, and I think as you eluded to there, the context is probably being is those injuries that come in after a few months of having groin pain as opposed to someone who is saying my adductor is a little bit sore after a game at the weekend.

 

First and foremost is nailing down a diagnosis, so you know what you are dealing with and what stage of pathology and letting that guide where to start.  Enda King would always say, ”it’s either for rehab, or it’s not,” so if it’s not for rehab there is a pathway you need to work through, but if it’s for rehab, this is what we are about and we need to start our process.  Anything around the groin is usually for rehab.

 

When I look at my groin process, that starts with looking at the athlete as a whole and nailing down what I think is contributing to that pathology.  So that starts with a thorough assessment and looking through some functional stuff:

 

  • Overhead squat
  • Single leg squat
  • Hopping
  • End range calf raises – ability to hold that position
  • General Range of Motion Assessments – pick out imbalances
  • Strength assessments – hip abduction/adduction, hip flexion/extension, abdominal loading

 

So with this you can build up a picture of what you think are your big rocks and what are the big rocks you are going to attack first?  With groins you can pick everything, and go at everything, but if you can pick the big 3 that you are going to go after- such as hip abduction/extension weakness on the right side, if there is a clear imbalance there, then that’s probably going to be pretty high on your list of priorities.  You’ll generally find hip strength is right up there on your big rocks.

 

 

In terms of the physio table assessments, I might be looking to see what can change your pain to guide where you are at, such as what actually improves your squeeze power?  If I go hard on some hip and glute exercises does that improve your squeeze power? If I do some timing or work on lumbo-pelvic hip complex (LPHC) positional changes, does that influence our clinical tests?  A bit of pelvic posterior tilt or embracing some abdominal work does that suggest that some of that LPHC work is guiding some of our symptoms? So we can start there.

 

‘Out of those exercises that might present pain, what kind of objective data are you getting off any of those assessments, where are collecting your objective data from?”

 

”It’s probably initially having a look at those aspects as a visual representation of where they are at, and picking out what you are seeing.  So, before I move onto some really true objective bench marking, it’s more about, okay, their single leg squat doesn’t look too good on the right side.  I go and test their hip abduction strength and that’s clearly showing a deficit, and then their hip extension strength might also show a bit of a deficit.  So that’s clearly bringing that level of importance up higher for me.  So, it’s more about stepping from there away, and then probably working our way through some of key objective testing to really see if that marries up.

Objective Testing

 

  • Isometric Hip Abduction test – 2-2.5 x bodyweight
  • Isometric Hip Extension – in a 45 degree position off the end of table with a force transducer – 9-10 x bodyweight
  • Isometric Hip Abduction/Adduction – often look for close to 1:1 ratio
  • Isometric Hip flexion (90 degrees and 0 degrees) squeeze test
  • Lumbo-pelvic hip complex (LPHC) test – double leg lower- lowering down and controlling that without falling into some anterior tilt.  I would like them to be able to lower all the way to the floor without losing their lumbo pelvic control.

 

Initially I wouldn’t look at some of the trunk capacity tests like side plank and plank holds etc

 

It is a balance between both our clinical benchmark testing and also what we can produce in the gym to get a bit more of a level of capacity and function in our bench marking, so as physios we our extending our-self more from the physio room and into the gym to tease out some of these capacity and strength markers.  If we are a physio and it’s not our skill set within the gym, then it is certainly about working with someone (S&C coach) who that is, so I’d encourage the physios to link up and work through what they are seeing and what the S&C coach is seeing to tease that out.

 

Gym Assessments

 

If we start with the end in mind, we want to have the highest level of capacity and tolerance so that they don’t break down again on the field.  So need to think about where we want the athlete to be at that point, where are they now and how do we get there?

 

 

We know that the loads and the forces and the preventative effect of the long lever Copenhagen test is really important so getting them to that level is part of what we do, and it’s probably not the stating point if they have been coming out of some pain and function probably won’t be able to do that.

 

  • Copenhagen long lever – 30 sec hold isometric or 2×10 if it’s eccentric/concentric work
  • LPHC Capacity test – Side plank 90-sec and Front Plank 2 minutes
  • Single leg squat – really good SLS,  1 set of 10  pistol squats down to 90 degrees free standing in good form and fashion
  • Split squat – pain free under some decent load – at least 30kg in a split squat biasing that rear leg position for some rec fem load
  • High level Abdominal function– clean reverse ab curls or exercises such as Hanging leg raises
  • General Strength – not forgetting general bench marking such as leg press, squat, deadlift and hinge targets relative to bodyweight.”

 

‘What are the common mistakes when implementing groin rehab in a team setting?”

 

Under-loading – to find the deficiencies and tease out those things, I think we are pretty good at that.  If they still have some pain, how are we addressing that? Are we saying have some rest, or just do a couple of little band exercises and hope it goes away, and its still there weeks later.  I think we can really get in early, and get really good loading to address what we need to do with weights etc.  Go hard at it, and go hard at it early – unloading in that early and mid phase will just drag groin issues along as we are not addressing what is driving it.

 

Racing to the finish line – The other one is often a groin will commonly fail you if it’s a chronic groin issue, and they often won’t fail you early, they will fail late.  You’ll put all this work in for 5-6 months and you’ll get them there, and there strength and capacity are let’s say 90%.  Then they go and perform in games repeatedly, or high level training sessions and they break down.  Essentially, they are just not taking that extra bit of time, or really nailing and having really clear benchmarks in your mind and not accepting anything less than that.

 

Not addressing anterior chain strength enough within rehab – hip flexion, abdominal or oblique strength.  If we only hit the hip strength we may be missing out on something.

 

Clearly you can get yourself in a bit of a hole if you say he is going to play in 4 weeks time.  It’s about buying your time setting expectations a little bit longer, and rather than setting a date in mind, it’s about working aggressively forward to make that change and putting it on the athlete early  and saying this is where you are at, this is where I want you and then having making sure you are having some routine testing through the process.

 

Be really strong on achieving those things that you think are important and pushing to get there.

 

‘When it comes to building an Injury Prevention System, what does that look like for you in terms of an overall philosophy?’

 

Primary Prevention

 

”As a general framework and how I see myself working within this as a physio, I look at primary prevention and addressing the key risk factors that go across the sport, including:

 

  • Knowing the common injuries in your sport
  • Making sure training loads are really high
  • Making sure athletes are really strong
  • Making sure athletes are recovering well – eating and sleeping well
  • Making sure athletes are hitting their speeds – and having a good speed exposure

 

Secondary Prevention

 

  • Individualising things more in the injury prevention process – to stop an injury from becoming more sinister, or putting things in place and being more selective in our IP approach by stopping the energy leaks.
  • Physio benchmarks – hip, calf and hamstring, and hopping metrics.  Most people do them, but it’s more about how well you to do and how much you pay attention to detail on the results but also the process following on from that.

 

Fitness Testing

 

With most players at the start of the season, we will look at:

 

  • hip strength (abduction/adduction)
  • hamstring strength (Nordic measure)
  • calf strength test– seated calf strength (on a force plate- 1.8 x bodyweight)
  • calf endurance test – calf raise to fatigue
  • 5 hop test (force plate)

 

We will look at the pie chart with all our benchmark norms and test that at least 3 times a year for some of our younger guys to see that they are improving and addressing those key areas.  For some of our main group or more senior athletes a lot of them might only have one or two things that are sitting at where we want them.  So then in that case we plug in an intervention (here’s your exercise or entry point,  this is our load and you need to progress it like so and here’s how many days a week you do it).  We will re-assess in 4 weeks and get every athlete at that level and once they are that level then fantastic, and we can go again to target something further that they think or we think will further assist them.

 

It’s about not over-intervening with the information you get.  You could jump at shadows and think, oh his groin squeeze is down, or his hamstring power is down.  But I think it is really important to know that our screening measures (and numbers we are getting) are NOT a decision making tool.

 

They are purely there to maybe flag something, or at least start that conversation with the physio, to say let’s look at this, and do a bit of that, then re-test that squeeze and we are away.  Or maybe we are seeing some range of motion down, some pain on his groin contractions, and some early signs of fatigue or under recovery of the adductor longus.  Now we want players training but clearly using our clinical knowledge and the context of where that player is at, and where they have come from, and where we are in the season, we might need to make really clear decisions about what is best for them and the team moving forwards so we are not ending up with an athlete who is struggling with groin pain for a few months.  We need to pick things up early and being really aggressive with what we are doing.

Top 5 Take Away Points:

 

  1. When I look at my groin process, that starts with looking at the athlete as a whole
  2. Isometric testing for the hip is an important part of the objective assessment for groin pain
  3. Gym assessments support the physio assessments such as Copenhagen long lever
  4. Avoid some of the pitfalls of groin rehab by being really strong on achieving those things that you think are important and pushing to get there.
  5. Avoid over-intervening – our screening measures (and numbers we are getting) are NOT a decision making tool.

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

You may also like from PPP:

 

Episode 442 Damian, Mark & Ted

Episode 444 Jermaine McCubbine

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 381 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 379 Jose Fernandez

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 370 Molly Binetti

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 442

This blog is a return to my usual review format of the Pacey Performance Podcast.

 

Episode 442 – Damian, Mark & Ted – Integrating deceleration training and testing into a high performance programme

 

Damian, Mark & Ted

Background

This episode of the Pacey Performance Podcast sees Rob speaking to Damian Harper, Mark Jamison and Ted Rath. This episode was recorded in the summer of 2021 as a Live roundtable. But it was that good that we had to release it as a podcast. 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Damian, Mark and Ted here

 

Discussion topics:

 

‘From a research point of view, Damian, what do we know about deceleration and why is it important?”

 

Damian Harper:

 

”I think it’s a really important area, and one which has largely been overlooked. Over the last few years there has been a big impetus to drive some better understanding of this task.  When we look at deceleration from a movement outcome, we are typically looking at trying to improve the athlete’s ability to reduce their speed with respect to time.

 

We want to increase the athlete’s ability to get high rates of deceleration from a movement outcome perspective, but it is also important to look at deceleration and braking as a movement skill.  With deceleration it is a really complex movement skill and I think we have got to acknowledge that.  That ability to be able to coordinate the limbs to apply a braking force, and once we have applied the forces, being able to safely attenuate the forces during deceleration.

 

Forces and Frequency

 

So when we look at those two components – the movement outcome and the movement skill we have recently proposed a definition based on those two factors, that deceleration should be considered as:

 

”the ability to reduce momentum in accordance with the objectives of the task and the constraints, whilst skillfully attenuating and distributing the forces associated with braking.”

 

So we have highlighted those two components – the braking force control – the ability to control braking forces. but then also the ability to be able to attenuate those braking forces.

 

It is important to start from the game perspective and look at the demands of the game.  In some of my early research we looked at the game demands of accelerating and decelerating at high intensities in games and what we actually found was quite surprising, that in most team sports when we monitored it with GPS above a high-intensity threshold, most team sports had a greater frequency of high intensity decelerations than high intensity accelerations.

 

In addition to frequency, we also looked at the forces, and the mechanical demands.  This is where deceleration becomes really distinct from other movement actions, and we could probably say that deceleration is the most mechanically demanding task from a force and loading perspective.

 

If we are backwards engineering in terms of demands, then we need to prepare athletes and in particular team sport athletes for these demands and high forces.  We are looking at up to 6 x bodyweight in some of the braking forces and that’s in really really short periods of time less than 50 milliseconds, so really high loading rates and really high magnitudes of forces that have to be 1) produced and 2) tolerated and attenuated throughout the lower limbs.”


”Is deceleration training getting the time in the programme that it deserves?”

 

”It is going to be sport specific as if you look at football in the UK, small-sided games, medium-sized games, large-sided games are very popular training methods throughout the training week, and those type of training activities do expose athletes to a high frequency of decelerations.  However, what I think we perhaps haven’t got a good as knowledge of is how we can actually improve the coordinative elements of the task, and how we can improve the athlete’s ability to perform those decelerations, outside of those game scenarios, like we have done for acceleration, with resisted acceleration work for example, and other exercise types for acceleration.  We are still developing knowledge in this area.”

 

”Let’s bring in Mark to talk about testing for deceleration. What options have we got and is this an area that is developing?”

 

Mark Jamison:

 

”Probably when we have been trying to quantify the braking forces, it has traditionally been in the return to play process, as you are slowly trying to progress those demands over time, and not just the braking forces themselves but the directional pattern of it.  I think we did a lot of that in the return to play setting but I don’t think it’s been as popular in the team setting, because I don’t think there has been as much access to good technology or a really efficient way to test in a full team setting.

 

The first thing we look at when we do any testing or assessments are what are the metrics that we are looking at that become actionable.  What are our key performance indicators (KPIs) for this movement, that are actually going to help drive the decision making process when it comes to making interventions or the programme itself.

 

Really, when I look at it from a deceleration standpoint and you are going to do some kind of assessment, what’s the deceleration distance, what’s the deceleration time, what is the rate of deceleration (that’s a difficult thing to test).  We have been fortunate as we have a radar timing device  that actually gives us the rate of deceleration, so we can actually see what the ”braking impulse” is.  Then we can look at early vs. late, so is it a safer strategy, so more time spent in that early deceleration, or are they truly coming from a really high entry velocity and braking really quickly?  So those are the things we look at from a deceleration standpoint.

 

 

But most of our movements are never a true dead stop so a lot of it is built within change of direction testing.  We have always done a 5-10-5 and t-test and L drill and I don’t think we’ve ever really looked at it as deceleration, we look at what’s the total time and what’s the speed of how fast you can do those drills.  We really need to look at the braking strategy- how well do they decelerate and what does their re-acceleration look like?  We have our deceleration KPIs and our re-acceleration KPIs, so what’s the re-acceleration time and what’s the rate of that re-acceleration?

 

From a testing setting, from a team standpoint, it is a little more difficult but the Acceleration Deceleration Ability (ADA) test is probably the easiest one to do in a full team setting.

 

 

We will have our athlete’s sprint for 20 yards and they don’t brake until 20, and it’s really easy to track what was their deceleration distance.  Time can be a little more difficult so obviously you’ll probably need some kind of video analysis to determine the time of the deceleration braking was, but you’re always going to have that deceleration distance.  Then you can provide different training interventions and ensure that they are actually responding well to that stimulus and improving. so at least we can then work out are they shortening that deceleration distance over time?

 

That’s easy to do in a team setting, but what is more difficult to do is determine what was the entry velocity.  In a pre-determined test they know they have to brake at a certain point, so they are probably not going to hit their highest entry velocity.  What we have found with our testing devices, is that when we do the ADA test, typically we are looking at 85-90% of peak velocity coming in, so it’s not a true max test.  I think it’s difficult to make it a max test when there is a predetermined braking spot.

 

A lot of what I really like to do from a deceleration standpoint is a 10-5 and a 15-5 change of direction test, so a 180 degree cut, start with a 10-5 (usually the entry velocity is around 70-75% of their maximum velocity) but we see from a safety point of view, there’s less braking forces with our testing devices  (-5-10 feet/sec 2) as the rate of deceleration (1.5-3.0 m/sec 2) and then we get to a 15-5 change of direction test, now we are touching more closely to that ADA test, so around 85% max velocity, and now the rate of deceleration is much higher (-10-15 feet/sec 2) so pretty high (3.0-4.6 m/sec 2).  We can dictate what is the re-acceleration pattern, what movement strategy are we going to provide and then take a look at what is the limb to limb symmetry on that, are there any movement limitations in terms of sprint to a backpedal, in terms of turn and sprint, crossover to sprint, and those different types of movement category selections they have.  So then we can look at what are the buckets we need to fill and look at from a movement intervention standpoint.

 

 

Example of a 10-5 (known as a modified 5-0-5, as used by the Lawn Tennis Association)

 

Daz comment:

 

Based on Graham-Smith (2018) research, he mentions ‘’it is important to put the changing of direction movement into context. The maximum speed that an athlete can attain prior to changing direction dictates how much braking impulse needs to be imparted. In game scenarios there is no specified ‘approach’ distance, so in order to understand the loading demands we first need to evaluate the athletes’ ability to accelerate and decelerate within set distances. I refer to two of the distances he tested:

 

10m from stop line – 5.8 m/s –> (72.2% of 30m MSS) –> -4.94m to stop
15m from stop line – 6.7 m/s –> (83.0% of 30m MSS) –> -6.61m to stop

 

At the Lawn Tennis Association, they use a Modified 5-0-5  (so it’s more like a 10m approach) with a total distance of approximately 10m before performing a 180 COD to the finish.

 

Now back to the Podcast review……

 

A test that I really like to do, which we have just started doing, is add a chaotic change of direction with a predetermined deceleration test.  So we go out to 80 feet (26 yards) and when the device cues them they sprint and go out and hit their max velocity. They don’t know exactly when they are going to have to decelerate and re-direct and go back to the device.  We give them that cue whether it is auditory or visual, but what we have seen is closer to 95% of max velocity on that brake itself so those impulses are significantly higher and we get a pretty good indication of what their max potential of deceleration is from that and it’s usually somewhere between 15 and 26 yards and when they sprint back they actually try to decelerate exactly on where the start position would be.

 

On the chaotic version the distance is always going to be variable which is a huge limitation, but I know the entry velocity, so ideally if I can get as close to above 90% max velocity I think it’s a relatively valid test.  So far, if it’s less than 90% I void it, and don’t count it.

 

The strategy changes quite drastically according to entry velocity.  In a 10-5 you really don’t lower your centre of mass much.  Your total range of motion on the braking strategy isn’t really that great.  When you look at when they are hitting closer to 90-95% of their maximum velocity, they really have to drop their centre of mass to receive and brake those forces and re-direct them so you see a huge level change.  Especially on the chaotic version, you start to see more poor kinematics because they don’t know when they are going to brake so they are not preparing for it.  You see a lot more excessive forward trunk lean, they are throwing their torso way out in front of their centre of mass, which is obviously going to lead to a high risk of injury.  But that’s good to know, because hopefully we can address it a little bit better in the kind of drills or interventions we use to try and train that.”

 

Damian Harper:

 

”The entry velocity completely changes the deceleration strategies and it’s a much harder task than acceleration, to be able to get a reliable deceleration assessment of the athlete.  The importance of being able to get the peak velocity the moment when the athlete starts the deceleration is critical for any reliable assessment of deceleration capable – the ability to know when the athlete is starting to decelerate.

 

 

We can start to look at the ratios between their acceleration ability and their deceleration ability to get some kind of understanding of where there may be training deficiencies and whether they can slow down what they can speed up.  Research on cheetahs showed that they had a 60% buffering capacity, meaning that their deceleration capacity was 60% greater than their acceleration capabilities.  I think that is very interesting and it is going to vary with different sports and different positional groups.”

 

”Physical qualities needed to improve it?”

 

Ted Rath:

 

”When you look at deceleration, what is the ultimate factor that accounts for a lot of it? It’s motor control, what is your ability to control your centre of mass.  You could have limitations because of joint structures, strength deficits, so for me it’s the opportunity and the ability to decelerate your centre of mass and properly put it in the correct position for your next movement.  Once again, what’s the goal, the deceleration goal, to get you into position for your next movement so you can re-accelerate and apply force into the ground and whatever direction you are attempting to go.  It could be through an opponent or into a direction in air.

 

With that comes eccentric strength variables, obviously you have to be strong enough and have ability to exert force into the ground at the proper angles at the proper time.  There is a sequencing component, so now a neuromuscular component.  What is your efficiency patterning, do you understand how to control your body weight in multiple angles?

 

We are looking at your ability to control loads eccentrically. there is tempo training you can do, but also at the opposite end of the Force-Velocity curve you have to be able to control weight and load (using your own bodyweight or an implement such as the Keiser power squat – and rapid eccentric braking.

 

In our off-season we start very, very basic.  We start very simple with controlling your own bodyweight so we’re going back to wall drills so we can start statically (load you isometrically), then we progress it to plyometric progressions where we are jumping but we’re also locking in and efficiently loading (eccentric movements) and then recovering force (progressing to ballistics) so for us it’s sticking landings with multi-directional force, unilateral landings, how do you land on 1 limb, how do you land on 2 limbs etc?  So that’s a lot of the ballistic eccentrics we do.”

 

Mark Jamison:

 

“From a plyometric standpoint we will work through lower level elasticity, reactive strength and then higher shock type work.  You have to get into what those change of direction angles look like, and more unilateral plyometric type exercises and progress the eccentric load, whether that’s jumping off higher boxes onto a single leg and having to re-direct or add load to those things and those patterns.

 

 

What we really utilize quite a bit is our K-box iso-inertial training, we found really high success with that and again you can really mimic with the squat pattern on the K-box the unweighting and braking rate of force development (RFD) on a countermovement jump.  We are hitting 120% eccentric peak power on the iso-inertial training compared to the concentric outputs.”

 

Damian Harper:

 

”There are certainly some specific eccentric qualities that are needed for deceleration.  We highlighted eccentric peak force, eccentric velocity and eccentric braking RFD, so training qualities in the gym that can target those qualities I think are really important.  I’m also a big fan of flywheel training as a way to get that eccentric overload and that should be part of the training strategies to increase the ability of the athlete to resist and control the (downwards) movement.  The flywheel also has the advantage of being able to load horizontally, if you’ve got the pulley devices you can do some fantastic exercises in the horizontal plane which is really important from a gym perspective, of the combination of horizontal and vertical loading.

 

Another training intervention that has some nice training applications for deceleration is isometric loading strategies, so I think the isometric yielding or quasi-isometric loading movements can be really powerful for deceleration, particularly for targeting the tendon structures.  For deceleration the tendons are really, really important and the connective tissues are that first line of defence so they are really important from a buffering point of view.  So you get a similar kind of eccentric loading with some of the isometric yielding exercises if you go for longer duration holds as well, where we can increase an athlete’s yielding capacity to resist that deformation.

 

As you start to move up in intensity to some of the more neural based interventions you can look at braking isometrics where we can target some of the braking specific positions and we can start to work with fast or explosive isometric actions targeting inter-limb braking positions using overcoming isometrics.  I’ve certainly been inspired by some of Alex Natera’s work on running isometrics and trying to flip that and think about how that can apply to braking isometrics.

 

Eccentric landing control, and some basic landing exercises as well as reactive strength being really important for deceleration because of that pre-tension and that ability to pre-activate the muscles prior to contact with the ground.”

 

‘When it comes to making technical improvements are there any go to exercises that you would recommend that coaches use with their athletes when it comes to developing those technical aspects of deceleration?”

 

Mark Jamison:

 

”High frequency, high exposure to it.  We keep the high days high and the low days low, but on a low day it is really easy to do a lot of sub-maximal change of direction work.  As we are teaching that we will put heart rate monitors on them and make sure we are in that zone that we want to be in from a training and conditioning standpoint, but we will expoae them to all the different cutting patterns, all the different change of direction patterns and every time they only go out about 4 yards and they have to stick every single plant and hold that position.

 

Then we can coach that position and you are also getting some kind of isometric exposure to that so you can work on some force at zero velocity when you re-accelerate out of that angle and position from a change of direction standpoint.

 

We have what we call the 4-8-12; where you sprint to 4 yards on to your right leg, backpedal back to zero; sprint to 8 yards plant and stick on your right leg, backpedal to 4, then you go out to 12, plant and stick on your right leg backpedal to eight and then sprint through.  We can work through sprint backpedal, shuffle, crossover and sprint.

 

If you do it really fast and you ask them, “how did that feel? they have no idea.”  If you slow it down they are more aware of it.  I see it as a motor skill continuum, there is always that subconscious dysfunction, can you make that a conscious dysfunction, can you at least be aware that you are probably not in the best position.  Here is what the correct position looks and feels like, and then continually expose them to it.”

 

 

Top 5 Take Away Points:

 

  1. Deceleration actions are high force and high frequency actions
  2. Acceleration Deceleration Ability (ADA) test is probably the easiest deceleration test to do in a full team setting.
  3. Motor control and eccentric strength are key components of deceleration ability
  4. Quasi-isometric yielding isometrics and overcoming isometrics are also good interventions to improve deceleration
  5. High frequency, high exposure of sub-maximal change of direction work will be beneficial to help improve deceleration.

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

You may also like from PPP:

 

Episode 444 Jermaine McCubbine

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 381 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 379 Jose Fernandez

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 370 Molly Binetti

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 370

This blog is a bit of a change up in my review of the Pacey Performance Podcast as I’ll be doing a ”shorter” form review of three Episodes in the next few blogs.

 

Episode 370 – Molly Binetti“Enhancing change of direction speed and agility in the real world”

Molly Binetti

 

Background

Molly Binetti is an experienced name in college sport, and is currently the Director of Women’s Basketball Performance at the University of South Carolina following various roles as a coach at the University of Louisville, Purdue University, and the University of Minnesota. Although she’s currently specialising in basketball, Molly’s previous experience includes S&C in volleyball, softball, tennis, diving, cheerleading, and baseball.

 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Molly here

 

Discussion topics:

‘Testing options for change of direction performance.  The fact that you don’t test a lot when it comes to change of direction, so I’d just love to get your thoughts on change of direction performance and test options that we do have, and your thoughts on this area”

 

“That’s definitely something that has changed for me over the course of my career in terms of shying away from truly testing COD or using a COD test, and I think when we look at key determinants of a good COD performance – you’ve got your physical capacities – how strong they are, how explosive they are, how powerful they are – and you can measure that and test that a multitude of ways in the weight room through strength testing, jump profiling, ground contact times, reactive strength rate of force development.  Even looking at those physical capacities alone can give you a pretty good idea of this athlete’s capabilities and what they might look like in terms of COD, because if you look at that those metrics are shit, chance are they are probably not a good mover either.

 

 

Then you look at the technical aspects of it, what does their centre of mass look like, what does their foot placement look like, what is their trunk doing, what is their pelvis doing, what kind of angles are they creating – and those are things that I have learned to assess every  single day in what we do, just by throwing them in to an environment where they have got to move, and throwing a lot of open drills at them honestly, because that gives me a lot of valuable information about what they look like before I even break things down and teach technique, and I want to see what they look like in an organic environment first.

 

The third component is that Agility and task specific aspect of it, and added the cognitive effects of that too.

 

So I break it down and figure out how you can evaluate each of those pieces and I have found that my best assessment of their ability to move is through the basic strength and jump profiling that we do in the weight room as well as I’m watching them move in practice every single day, and seeing what their movement looks like and I’m talking to their coaches about how they move and how they see them move.

 

I think we take a little bit different approach to it, because typically in the strength & conditioning field, and especially in the college sector when we talk about teaching movement it is done in a very controlled manner, with very few fluctuations.  That used to be too when I teach COD, but I have shied away from that and I really like to incorporate a lot of game play and problem solving activities within the warm-ups and then I can regress if I need to, to teach technique and using the warm-up period to incorporate some of those more closed drills, lateral movements, acceleration-deceleration, hip turns, rotational movements and just incorporating them every single day to get small exposures to it.

 

Exposure athletes to open drills right off the bat and see what they do naturally.

 

But I have really just found that doing a COD test like a Pro Agility doesn’t really give me any information, and I’ve found that just because they get better at that test, doesn’t mean that their actual movement performance is getting better in the place where it matters most, which is on the basketball court.  We know that sport is chaos and it involves so many different components and so if I can get a pretty accurate idea through the testing that we are doing in the weight room, talking with the sport coaches, and watching them in practice I can really figure out where their deficiency is – is it a physical capacity, is it technical/tactical or is it cognitive? From there I can figure out where we need to spend time on from a movement side of things.”

 

‘”Can we dive a little bit into the testing itself, and then link what you do in the jump testing with the intricacies of what you want to achieve in the COD ability?”

 

“So we are pretty fancy here, and we use the just jump mat, but I will say you don’t need a lot, you don’t need a force plate to measure some of the qualities, so I will go through a pretty thorough jump profile with them.  We will do:

 

  • Drop jump – double leg and single leg
  • Counter movement jump (CMJ) – double leg and single leg (both off one leg and land on one leg, and off one leg and land on two legs, so they are not worried about landing on one)
  • Repeat 4 jump test – average of the four jump height and the average GCT – both double leg and single leg- look at right and left leg to see the reactivity right to left and see what those differences are.

 

What I have found to be honest, is that, especially for the first couple of years that I get an athlete here, most of the time they just need to train consistently and then all those qualities are going to improve.  And then it’s really once we have an athlete who has been in our programme for 2-3 years and that’s when some of those individual specific differences come into play and how is that information being used to individualise training

 

  • Is this an athlete that jumps slow but jumps high – okay I know I need to train a little bit more of my time on creating a little bit faster SSC?
  • Is this athlete have a really significant right to left deficiency– okay let’s try and close the gap there – and is that showing up on what we are seeing on the court as well?

 

We have 16 athletes and that’s my only programme.  We are taking that information and break down player by player and focus on what the player needs, as opposed to being in a big team setting where everyone has got a pretty similar programme and we have small tweaks here and there.”

 

 

Top 5 Take Away Points:

 

  1. Understand the components of Agility – Physical, Technique and Cognitive.
  2. Best assessment of their ability to move is through the basic strength and jump profiling and watching them move on the court.
  3. COD test like a Pro Agility doesn’t really give me any information.
  4. Go through a thorough jump profile including double leg and single leg
  5. Exposure athletes to open drills right off the bat and see what they do naturally.

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

You may also like from PPP:

 

Episode 444 Jermaine McCubbine

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 370 Molly Binetti

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favour to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 444

This blog is a bit of a change up in my review of the Pacey Performance Podcast as I’ll be doing a ”shorter” form review of three Episodes in the next few blogs.

 

Episode 444 – Jermaine McCubbine – The ”hybrid” S&C coach: Physical Preparation, Rehabilitation & Data Management

 

Jermaine McCubbine

Background

 

Jermaine is First Team Strength and Conditioning Coach at PSV Eindhoven.  Jermaine has worked at PSV for a number of years, progressing from an academy position into a role within the first team.  He actually started out as a sports therapist and personal trainer before transitioning strength & conditioning.

 

🔉 Listen to the full episode with Jermaine here

 

Discussion topics:

 

‘Can you give people an insight into your process of rehabilitating a hamstring and your philosophy of dealing with hamstrings?”

 

”Of course, it firstly depends on the injury itself.  Is it:

 

  • Grade 1, 2 or 3
  • Proximal or distal
  • Within muscle belly or within tendon
  • Re-injury or same site
  • Estimated return to play timelines

 

You are always going to split your rehab up into phases.  For me, I will always ”programme the satnav” first, so starting from the end and then working back, so we have a loose framework.  I do use the Matt Tabener control-chaos continuum and it’s a process that even within the club everyone knows the CCC continuum and what it means.

 

So, if the end criteria is Return to Play then if we are looking from a testing standpoint, we are looking for:

 

  • all the markers to be at minimum of baseline in comparison to contra-lateral limb.
  • exposure to maximum velocity
  • multi-directional chaos and high end magnitude and density of accelerations and decelerations through the full range of the clock – whether that’s 45 degrees, 90, 135 or 180 degrees
  • curvilinear running with various start and end positions.

 

To map that, and start at the beginning, you enter into your PROTECTION Phase.

 

Phase 1 – Protection Phase

 

  • predominantly physio lead – isometric type work
  • looking at tissue healing strategies
  • importance of relationships between physio and S&C coach
  • Address possibilities – what can they do?
  • Readdress nutritional intake and off feet conditioning programme to ensure there is no decrements in performance
  • Can we train the other limb?

 

From an S&C point of view, as soon as you are at the point where you can start doing some isometric strength I’m going to start to assess that muscle.

 

  • How much force you can produce in comparison to the other limb
  • It might not be you go 100% of course.  But if you’re only delivering 20% and that’s what you feel comfortable delivering that’s okay, and then we will track that throughout rehab, looking at net PEAK FORCE and time to contraction and some other variables so we can see when it starts to stabilise and if the phase and the exit criteria we are setting is in line with what we want.

 

The ultimate goal is to get you back in the fastest and safest possible way with minimal chance of reoccurence.

 

Phase 2  – Load Introduction

 

  • Introduced to key movement patterns – squat, hinge patterns etc
  • Extensive type strength endurance work
  • Still continue with some isometric type work
  • Possible changing of lever lengths, time under tension
  • Possible bilateral to unilateral

 

Phase 3-  Strength Development

 

  • Increase the variables so more load or more complexity – including some eccentrics
  • More and more unilateral training
  • Measuring strength throughout this
  • Eventually going into training integration and return to play – reactive strength, maximum speed exposure

 

Everything must progress so you are not missing out on any blocks.  So for example, running continuum, I like to go long to short approach.  So on the field, you might do field lengths at a speed of 40% of maximum speed.  If that goes well, can we progress it to 50%, then 60% etc before we start to get into the more speed endurance type work and eventually bringing you into a phase where speed goes up, intensity goes up and volume comes down.  Once you are at the end stage, volume can go up as well.

 

”So how are you measuring strength.  Can you tell me more about that?”

 

 

That’s how I initiate my isometric type work looking at 90 degrees and also 30 degrees from full extension.

 

Once you have done this test and you have your baseline, and using the other limb as a reference point, track that throughout the rehab to ensure that:

 

  1. You are looking at the asymmetry value
  2. The relationship between high speed running and your raw scores – so are you adequately prepared to go out and run.  I wouldn’t expose you to max speed sprinting until your peak force was within 10-15% and it’s more that early rate of force development (RFD), so net peak force at 100 milliseconds.  Those contraction time intervals are linked to top speed running ground foot contacts.

 

So if we have large asymmetries in peak force across limbs in let’s say at bicep femoris, and you have huge asymmetries in contraction time in early RFD there is no way that I am going to let you sprint.   I have seen from testing and screening players that you can get that down to an acceptable limit of less than 10%, so I’m going to push that.  And it’s not just numbers on a force plate, as well as seeing how you are moving out on the pitch, do you have good lumbar-pelvic-hip (LBP) control, do you have good front side and back side mechanics, and do I feel confident enough to expose you to what is the highest risk which is asking you to sprint maximally?

 

If all those things are good, then that’s a green light for me.

 

”When would you introduce the high intensity eccentric training means, as I know jack Hickey did some work in this area?”

 

Jack Hickey – When and how to introduce high intensity eccentric exercises during hamstring rehabilitation

 

📝 Read the full article with Jack here

 

”After you isometric work in the Protection phase, once you start to introduce them to load you might do for example, an eccentric slider.  So if that’s okay, I can increase volume on that and also complexity as well.  But ultimately our end goal is to start doing some higher intensity work that is more game specific.  So if we look at the isometric continuum  level we might be doing a long lever bridge on the floor (bilateral) as an entry point, but at the other end of the spectrum I want you to be doing some quasi-isometrics in single leg such as Bosch isometric switches, some medicine ball throws in these extended positions, as well as doing some Swiss ball hamstring tantrums, prone kickers, those high velocity eccentric-contentric type work.  So if I know that’s my end point in a gym point of view, then my start point is just following a continuum and making sure it’s a seamless transition.

Top 5 Take Away Points:

 

  1. Split your rehab up into phases starting with the end in mind.
  2. Know your Return to Play End Criteria
  3. Assess peak force at 100ms throughout rehab to track performance
  4. Have a progression approach to running volume, load and complexity
  5. Look for asymmetries in peak force at 100ms of less than 10% as a guide to return to Max Velocity.

 

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

You may also like from PPP:

 

Episode 414-418 Pete, Phil and Nathan

Episode 413 Marco Altini

Episode 410 Shawn Myszka

Episode 400 Des, Dave and Bish

Episode 385 Paul Comfort

Episode 383 James Moore

Episode 381 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 380 Alastair McBurnie & Tom Dos’Santos

Episode 379 Jose Fernandez

Episode 372 Jeremy Sheppard & Dana Agar Newman

Episode 367 Gareth Sandford

Episode 362 Matt Van Dyke

Episode 361 John Wagle

Episode 359 Damien Harper

Episode 348 Keith Barr

Episode 331 Danny Lum

Episode 298 PJ Vazel

Episode 297 Cam Jose

Episode 295 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 292 Loren Landow

Episode 286 Stu McMillan

Episode 272 Hakan Anderrson

Episode 227, 55 JB Morin

Episode 217, 51 Derek Evely

Episode 212 Boo Schexnayder

Episode 207, 3 Mike Young

Episode 204, 64 James Wild

Episode 192 Sprint Masterclass

Episode 183 Derek Hansen

Episode 175 Jason Hettler

Episode 87 Dan Pfaff

Episode 55 Jonas Dodoo

Episode 15 Carl Valle

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

How Do We Learn To Move – Part 2

This blog has been simmering for a few years now.  I wanted to share my experiences as someone who has been coaching for 20 years, and has subscribed to one particular philosophy of coaching athletes how to move- only to move away from this way in recent years.

 

In Part 1 – I summarised an excellent presentation from Paul Venner – Frans Bosch System & Aquabags

 

Paul really connected a few dots for me in terms of the synergy between the ”Top down” (CNS dominant) approach and the ”Bottom Up” (Muscle dominant approach).  It made me realise why strength & conditioning coaches (myself included) have got a bit lost when we try to ”teach” dynamic movement activities (that have a time constraint) using the same approach we use with the heavy strength compound lifts (that have a load constraint) but where you can take much longer – relatively speaking – to complete the action.

 

 

I personally prefer Gray Cook’s explanation of hardware vs software which I referred to in a recent blog – How Do You Decide on the Goals of an S&C programme?  Gray Cooks asks:

 

Is it a ”software issue”, meaning they  just need to practice the movement more to gain competence and develop the software (the neural input- ability to time and coordinate a specific pattern)?  Or is it that they lack the hardware (the muscles, the bones, and the tissues resulting from not having enough mobility & stability to get into the position in the first place).

 

It takes a lot of time for the tissue to remodel.  And when you’re doing strength training for the first time you’re doing software re-organisation for the first 3-4 weeks before you ever get any change in tissues like increased bone density or hypertrophy of muscles.”

 

However, I get where Paul is coming from when he talks about CNS vs Muscle dominant control.  He is talking about those motor control process where we have time (think Max Strength) vs those where we don’t (think evading an opponent in rugby).

 

Power Training Methods

 

The only word of caution I would give is do your own needs analysis of your sport.   There has been an increasing focus on the concept of muscle slack and co-contractions and its importance in high-intensity high-speed actions such as sprinting, jump take-offs and high-speed change of directions.

 

In practice this will mean focus on maximum power methods which emphasise pre-tension – with little or no external load (in max strength training the load builds tension, but out on the field I don’t have external load so I have to build it myself).  This is based on the concept of muscle slack, and getting rid of it!  I want to be able to get up without going down first and the way to train that is with pre-tension and using no load or changing loads such as aqua bags to train this ”co-contraction” control.

 

In my sport of tennis I can find scenarios where this might be the case (running forehand) when they have to run the entire width of the baseline (8 metres) and reach speeds of 4 m/s or more.  In this example, all the peak ground reaction forces (GRF) during landing occur within 0.05 seconds (approx 3 x body weight).   So yes, some work on power methods that focus on co-contraction could make sense there.

 

But in a typical 180 degree cut the peak GRFs during the penultimate step take place around 0.35-0.44 seconds – Mechanical Determinants of Faster Change of Direction Speed Performance in Male Athletes (2017).

 

The 180◦ COD plant step in another study was found to be >0.25 s, the only COD manoeuvre where the plant step was not reliant on a fast stretch-shortening cycle – Effect of Approach Distance and Change of Direction Angles Upon Step and Joint Kinematics, Peak Muscle Activation, and Change of Direction Performance (2020)

 

So, I would argue that this is a movement where you will use the ”Slow SSC” to go down first in order to get back up, which I refer to as ”load and explode.”

 

But, any way, back to the topic at hand – How We Learn to Move.

 

Rob Gray – Software Re-Organisation

 

Going back to Gray Cook’s point that when you’re doing strength training (or any new skill for that matter) for the first time, you’re doing software re-organisation for the first 3-4 weeks before you ever get any change in tissues like increased bone density or hypertrophy of muscles. 

 

I really like the term ”software re-organisation,” and I think most coaches will agree with the idea that we are trying to get the athlete to organise their movements better – that is to say the ability to time and coordinate a specific pattern, when we are teaching movement skills.

 

 

However, in his book Rob offers a compelling argument for why we need to completely review how we have traditionally gone about teaching athletes movement skills.  I have highlighted so many passages that really the best thing to do is just go out and buy a copy yourself.  In my blog I focus on the first six chapters which cover the theory – the ”Why.”  If you want to learn more about the ”How” you’ll have to read the book for yourself.

 

For those of you who want the ”cliff notes” I’ll try my best to succinctly summarise the key take home points.

 

Ben Linder – ITF Academy (previously iCoach)

 

I have to mention first, long before I read this book, it was the work of the Swiss Tennis Federation Head of S&C Beni Linder, that opened my eyes to ”how” to do this practically.  He did very little in the way of closed drills.

 

“Every-time you show a child how to do something, you take away their ability to learn it.”

 

Our coaching practice should be based on guided discovery, loose description, make the players work it out.”   There was definitely an increase in complexity of the challenges throughout the session but even at the beginning when he was working on first step lateral speed to the left or right, he would make it random, and they had to respond to the information in the environment (in this case a command from the coach).  There were very few times when there wasn’t some kind of ball (tennis ball or basket ball) that the athlete had to organise themselves with.  Check out some of his work on the ITF Academy website if you want more insights on how to use a constraints led approach and differential learning.  Any way, back to the book…

 

Preface

 

  • Soccer, football, baseball and tennis are incredibly exciting, dynamic activities.  So, why then do we practice them in such a static, isolated, and choreographed way?
  • The dominant view has been that we become skillful by trying to repeat the one, ”correct” technique.
  • Repetition is not only not the key to becoming skillful – it is impossible.
  • When we acquire a new skill, we want to harness the natural inconsistency and variability in our bodies rather than treating it as noise and attempting to tame it through repetition.
  • There is a new role for the coach too.  Coaches need to be innovative practice designers adopting approaches like the Constraints Led Approach and Differential Learning.

 

The Myth of One ”Correct” Repeatable Technique

 

  • Nikolai Bernstein blacksmith study – the experienced blacksmith hit the same spot on the chisel but not by repeating the same movement every time.  We repeat an ACTION OUTCOME but not by repeating the movement that produced it – repetition without repetition.
  • We don’t repeat our movements, but they are not completely random and variable either.  They are shaped by the constraints of our environment.
  • Most of the modern history of movement science has been the study of groups.  The fact that we can put one number (an average) on an expert’s movements does not mean that there is one correct technique, and all experts do the same thing.
  • Variability, not repeatability or repetition, rules the day in skilled performance.
  • Having more than one solution to achieve the same outcome makes us robust and adaptable.

 

The Business of Producing Movements & Why We Don’t Need a Boss

 

  • If the variability in our body allows us to move in multiple different ways to achieve the same goal, how then do we chose which way to move?
  • This problem has been coined the ”degrees of freedom” problem.  This is to say, in a movement of a joint, you are ”free” to chose the values they have in order to execute an action.
  • To understand how we solve this fundamental problem of coordination, let’s look at the ”business” of motor control
  • THEORY 1 – control of action is based on a company structure of top down, hierarchical, top-down control.  Learning to move successfully primarily comes from having an effective boss (the brain of the company): one that can take in and process all the information and anticipate what needs to be done next.  Richard Schmidt – Generalised Motor Programme (GMP).
  • We have smartly designed a business that can be broken into parts, trained and then put back together.  Examples include: hitting a ball off a tee in baseball or dribbling a ball around cones in soccer.  There are no decisions involved.
  • THEORY 2 – Self-Organisation.    There is no boss!  Consider a flock of birds.  Individually, their reaction time was about 40 ms.  Yet their time to start a turn in a flock was only about 15 ms. When flocking they were turning faster than they could react.  In this business model, order and structure in the company arises from the interactions between the lower-level components of the system, not by some rules or a plan given by a higher level.  The workers are organising themselves using only the information available to them, without the need for a boss.  Instead of a hierarchical system we have perception-action coupling.  That is, our actions are directly controlled by what we perceive (without any need for processing and analysis).

 

Freedom Through Constraints

  • Actions are not caused by constraints.  Rather, constraints serve to exclude some actions
  • So the performer still comes up with their own movement solution through self-organisation – it’s just that their potential options for doing this have been reduced or constrained.

 

The Laws of Attraction – Part 1

 

  • Why do all elite athletes seem to use somewhat similar techniques for performing things? If skill really involved this highly variable process of self-organisation, shouldn’t we see more variety in the way we act?
  • As it turns out, the ”landscape” of perceptual-motor solutions is not flat. Instead it has a few valleys in it, and there are certain relationships that are more ”attractive” and stable than others.
  • Even though, in theory, there are an endless number of movement solutions we could use, we all have certain coordination tendencies.
  • Why do these attractors in coordination exist?  They make us resistant to perturbations.  They help prevent injuries.  They allow us to deal with the extreme time pressures involved in many sporting actions.
  • In order to learn a new skill, in most cases, we need to get out there and explore the perceptual-motor landscape to find new coordination solutions.
  • Our attractors will resist our attempts to move into less stable regions of the landscape (even if long term it is a more efficient way of performing the action).

 

The Laws of Attraction – Part 2

 

  • The athletes we work with are not blank slates.  A movement solution is built on top of the perceptual-motor landscape the athlete brings to the first day of practice.
  • Some attractors have already been built through early experience.
  • The movement solution we come up with is shaped by the constraints we face when practising a skill.
  • Effective coaching involves making sure that the constraints that the athlete faces in practice encourage them to climb out of attractor valleys and explore the perceptual-motor landscape.
  • How do you encourage a learner to get out of their attractor valleys and get into these unstable regions? By adding a constraint.
  • Learning is not a predictable process where we can just give the individual the ”correct technique” and expect success.
  • To best support skill acquisition, we need to change the concept of the coach from ”instructor” (I have the correct solution and I’m here to give it to you) to that of a designer and a guide.
  • An effective coach should attempt to design practice environments that foster and promote self-organisation rather than prescribing a solution to the athlete.
  • The second part of being an effective coach is about being an informed and knowledgeable guide through the search process.
  • A common misconception about this new approach to skill, is that it is just ”set it and forget it.’  That is, once the coach designs the practice, they just let it run without saying anything or stepping in.  Just let me play games, and don’t coach them how to do it.  That could not be further from the truth.
  • Coaches should be observing practice to look out for solutions the athlete uses that will not be effective or will have the potential to produce injury.  They should also be looking to see if the athlete is not taking the opportunities for action (the ”affordances” they are trying to amplify) they have created.
  • In all these cases, the coach can and should step in and try to guide the search in a different direction.

 

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter

How Much Do You Train Your Serve?

This blog is an update on the Vision of APA and a run down of the findings of the first Pilot Study looking at shot frequency data for junior elite tennis players.

 

I’ve mentioned previously that APA has the goal of being the ”Best Tennis S&C Team in the World” by 2025. This will be achieved in two parts. Firstly, by carrying out the most thorough tennis research project ever undertaken by an S&C company, with the goal of determining the physical determinants of elite tennis performance.  I have been referring to this as my ”unofficial PhD.”

 

Secondly, by using the findings of the research to identify the most impactful training methods (APA Method 2.0) and undertake them with our athletes so they can best prepare for the current and future demands of professional tennis.

 

We have identified four areas of research interest:

 

1. Workload profiles – of training, simulated match-play and competitive tournaments

 

2. Serve – assessment of IR/ER shoulder rotation strength ratios, response to fatigue and relationship with serve velocity

 

3. Groundstrokes – assessment of rotational strength and power metrics and relationship with groundstroke velocity

 

4. Movement – deceleration profiling, assessment of peak force and RFD of selected muscles (quadriceps and soleus) and relationship to movement velocities performed in match play.

 

Pilot Study #1 – Workload Profiling

 

As much as I would like to think that the strength & conditioning training in the gym plays a big part in helping players meet the physical demands of professional tennis, the bottom line is that the ”physical work” done on the court counts most.  It’s the old adage of ”training tougher than a match.”  So for me, the first priority was to gain some info on what is going on, on the tennis court.

 

For the first study I wanted to look at workload profiles of the players I work with, basically to see how the intensity of the tennis training compares to the [limited] data we have on workload profiles of pro players.

 

For those of you who are a bit more into the science, it’s worth noting that recently it has been shown that upper arm injuries and in-event treatment frequency increased by ≥2.4 times in both sexes at the Australian Open Grand Slam over a 5-year period (Gesheit et al., 2017).  These kinds of injuries are a direct result of the mechanical loads imposed on the musculoskeletal system (especially the serve) and it is suggested that some measure of ball striking be considered to feature in an upper limb/body exposure (Reid et al., 2018).

 

The Game Insight Group (GIG) formed by Tennis Australia with Victoria University produce some cool stats on the Australian open using Hawkeye data – such as number of sprints (a sprint is a minimum of 5.5m travelling at least 4 m/s), Distance covered (km) and Hitting load (combines the number of shots a player has hit and how hard they hit them).  Djokovic, for example will sprint on average 19 times a match, and in 2021 did 117 sprints across the 7 matches.

 

 

In all honesty, my ideal scenario would have been to look at workload profiles using intensity markers of the game such as Heart Rate and number of accelerations and decelerations if I had the technology (such as a GPS system and Heart Rate monitoring system).   I think this kind of data would have best helped me to answer the question:

 

”How might our training and planning prepare players for match intensity & match volume experienced on the Tour?”

 

Given I didn’t have that technology, I opted instead to use Swing Vision (Player & Ball tracking app) to collect data from a selection of Junior National level players training at a full-time tennis Academy, for an entire week of training.  I rationalised that this would enable me to carry out a qualitative analysis of shot frequency in training, and simulated match-play- which might give an indirect measure of training intensity & volume.

 

Furthermore, if I am going to follow up this pilot study with some research on training interventions to prepare the body for the serve and groundstroke demands, I figured it would make sense to first know how many times they perform these actions in training.

 

Therefore, the goal of this study was to quantify the number of strokes and the hitting intensities (rate of strokes per minute) performed by junior players during their on-court sessions over one week using Swing Vision.

 

What Did I Find Out?

 

Keeping in mind the old adage ”training tougher than a match,” what I would I say I found out is that ”training is different to a match.”

 

I’ve already presented some compelling data that the Tennis KPIs that count most (and therefore explain most of the variance in elite tennis performance between those in the Top 100 and those outside it) largely comes down to serve and return metrics.  So some of the findings of my research did surprise me somewhat.

 

Figure 1 shows the average distribution of forehands, backhands and serves hit during each of the five tennis sessions for the group of Junior full-time players.

 

 

On average, the duration of a tennis session was 77.0 minutes in which players hit 190 forehands, 117 backhands, and 43 serves. The average weekly number of forehand shots was significantly higher than that of backhand shots. Both average weekly number of forehand and backhand shots were both significantly higher than that of serves.

 

On average, the peak stroke rate was 6.8 strokes/minute.

 

 

The Serve

 

In a typical match you can expect to hit around 120 serves, which accounts for 36% of all shots hit in a match.

 

The biggest finding was that in all juniors tracked, the serve accounted on average for:

 

8.7% of all shots hit per week, and an average of 43 per day (with a peak of 79).

 

 

Groundstrokes

 

In a typical match you might hit 210 groundstrokes which accounts for 64% of all shots hit in a match.

 

In my analysis of junior elite players the number of groundstrokes played per session was 278 on average.

 

 

Shots in the 0-4 range

 

In a match, 70% of points that pro male players play are in the 0-4 shot range. For pro female players that number is 66%.

 

In my analysis of junior elite players the number of rallies played in the 0-4 range averaged 62%. 

 

Or in other words, the majority of points that pro players play, finish before the 5th shot. And that’s worth noting.  If pro players’ rallies are ending in the first 4 shots, in practice that means that they are hitting a serve, a return, the server hits a second shot and the returner hits a second shot and that’s it – rally over.

 

In my research, I found out that the majority of the rallies were in the 0-4 shot range so one can conclude that the training is ”representative” of what goes on it a match.  However, one significant conclusion we can make, is that due to the low number of serves hit, it is fair to assume most of these rally exchanges were initiated with some form of feed (either by the coach or one of the players, rather than a serve).

 

When we focus on what shots the players are actually hitting in matches, I think there’s probably some insight that needs to be taken into account.  Like, for example, that the serve and return are pretty important.  And I would say that they are really important no matter the level of play.  And therefore there is something to be learned from looking at the stats of professional players in matches.

 

Discussion

 

The main finding is that there is a large disparity between the average numbers of serves, forehands and backhands hit in each session. The average forehand/backhand ratio in my pilot study was 1.62 which is higher than 1.24 ± 0.37 found for professional male players in competition (Reid et al, 2016). If the overemphasis on forehand shots seems to be a feature of the modern game, it should not be to the detriment of the improvement of backhand shots. Indeed, a study revealed that forehands are associated with a greater number of points won, while more points are lost with backhands played as the final shot (Cam et al., 2013).

 

It could be argued that these results are unsurprising if one shot is played (or practiced) more than the other.  Moreover, the average external load of training seems not to match the demands of competition which may be the goal in the pre-season. The hitting intensities (strokes/min) of groundstroke shots peaked at 6.8 and are lower than those observed by Murphy et al. (2016)  for training session (7 ± 1.0), simulated match play (10 ± 5.1) and tournament (14 ± 3.6). This difference could be due to longer rest time and/or a more technical/tactical focus.

 

Regarding the average number of serves reported in my pilot study of 43, this number was lower than the 120 serves proposed by Myers et al. (2016). My results are similar to those of Perry et al. (2018) who observed that the number of serves during training session was significantly lower than that of competition for U15 male players (38.6 ± 24.2 vs 82.0 ± 24.8).  Because tournament schedules for junior players are often condensed, the players may be required to play several matches in few days with a number of total serves that exceeds that of their current training week. This difference in volume of serves in competition compared to training suggests that coaches should better plan training serve loads (volume and intensity) to match competition to ensure a reduction in injury risk from inadequate exposure.

 

Coach Perspective

 

When you are a coach of either one player or perhaps a group of players, you only have 60-90 minutes to develop their game.  Speaking to a Head coach recently he shared with me ”When you think how much time it takes to hit let’s say 10 purposeful serves, and 10 purposeful forehands it’s like worlds apart. If you do one serve every 30 seconds that’s 5 minutes, but you could hit those same purposeful forehands in 15 seconds.  So that might skew your numbers slightly, and if we were to look it in more detail, we’d have to look at it and say, right, what are we saying a serve is worth versus a groundstroke?  I think that’s where I’m at with it.

 

So player education would be key and one way to improve serving across the week is to say to the kids, you can serve on your own and you need to serve at full power.  Some kids will do it, some kids won’t.  Also, some re-education of the parents.  Unfortunately if I did an hour of serving with a player and a parent was watching, it can look like a slow paced low intensity session, which is a tricky one.”

 

Training Recommendations

 

Different recommendations may be implemented during training sessions to both improve serving efficiency and decrease the risk of overload shoulder injury. Firstly, the volume and the intensity of serves should be variable from session to session to allow tissue regeneration and should be planned with intervals simulating the real game (Myers et al, 2016).

 

I’d like to see some days where the emphasis is on volume and hitting over 100 serves in a practice, and other days where the emphasis is on intensity, and aiming to hit your fastest serve possible with only 10-20 serves total.

 

I’d also like to see realistic practice conditions where more of the serving performed is to a returner who returns the ball and then the server has to hit the next shot (serve +1).  So many serves I saw were hit into the service box without an opponent, and even if there was an opponent and they did return it, often times the server would not recover their position and attempt to hit it back.

 

Finally, bear in mind that in a match you may hit over 100 serves and ALL of these are hit with maximum effort.  Of the 43 serves on average that were hit in practice, I can bear witness that less than half of those were anywhere close to maximum effort.

 

Insights from Spellman Performance

 

Les Spellman, owner of Spellman Performance recently spoke on the Pacey Performance Podcast on the topic of year round sprint speed development.  Although the topic was different, if you replace [sprint] with the word [serve] I think the advice is still equally relevant.  See below what Les had to say:

 

”In-season our approach was to maintain the resisted sprints and you surf the curve (so you go from heavy, to medium and light at different time periods) and then you allow practice to be fast.  You allow practice to have the high velocities and you make sure guys hit top speed in games.  What we realised was that we are getting the peak outputs in games, which is what you want – you want to play fast.

 

We are creating an environment where players are allowed to play fast where they’re not coming into the game where they are cooked.  Most coaches may think, you don’t want to do those resisted sprints in season as it might pull back from their velocity qualities, but we’re micro-dosing it, we are only doing 2-4 reps in a session.  But just that minimal dosage was allowing that athlete to maintain that ability to be very aggressive with their acceleration and have a lot of power, and then practices started to be performed faster, and hit new PBs in speed.  It became a culture where guys wanted to run fast in practice.

 

The game and the actual system should allow players to run fast in practice.  It shouldn’t just be a volume base.  There should be adequate rest periods.  There should be spacing to make the field big enough, wide enough, whatever, reduce the number of players, to allow the players to hit top speed.  So you start to get those outputs in game and you don’t always have to artificially expose players to top speed.  Now you can if they don’t in practice, okay go and do it.  But if you get 95% of top speed reached in practice, okay cool, box checked.  And when you have coaches that buy in, and say yes, let’s practice fast, it makes it easy.”

 

Hope you have found this article useful.

 

Remember:

 

  • If you’re not subscribed yet, click here to get free email updates, so we can stay in touch.
  • Share this post using the buttons on the top and bottom of the post. As one of this blog’s first readers, I’m not just hoping you’ll tell your friends about it. I’m counting on it.
  • Leave a comment, telling me where you’re struggling and how I can help

 

Since you’re here…

 

…we have a small favor to ask.  APA aim to bring you compelling content from the world of sports science and coaching.  We are devoted to making athletes fitter, faster and stronger so they can excel in sport. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — APA TEAM

 

=> Follow us on Facebook

=> Follow us on Instagram

=> Follow us on Twitter