APA Blog Archives - Page 2 of 33 - Athletic Performance Academy

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 314

Episode 314 – Les Spellman – Getting athletes fast when time is limited

Les Spellman

Background

In this episode of the Pacey Performance Podcast I am speaking to Owner of Spellman Performance, Les Spellman. With the NFL back up and running I thought it would be a perfect time to get a guest on the podcast who prepares these athletes for the coming months.

🔉 Listen to the full episode here

Discussion topics:

”A team sport athlete that has never done speed work before, just give me your general thoughts and give the listener a sense of where your heads at when that athlete turns up to your group?”

”Initially I prefer the athlete that has never done any speed work before, because they have no bias coming into it. When they’re raw I love it, it’s like a raw piece of clay. Our system will teach them the things that they need to learn.

It doesn’t matter if they are a professional athlete or a lower level; the first thing we are going to do is profile the athlete. Sometimes they have these things that we might consider are bad habits or we might say are incorrect, but when we profile them, we see their horizontal forces are amazing, their power and velocity are super high. So, it might be something that if we try to change just because we want them to fit into a certain technical box, we might end up undoing some of those things [that make them great]. One thing I learned from Jonas is just be very cautious about changing too many things at once, especially if it’s something where that athlete is wired that way. Because if we unwire them we better be able to support them, and do everything else we can do to make them take that new neural pathway on.

The main thing we do is profile them, and the second thing we do is build out the technical model. For example, if they are consistently high on their toes, we have vertical drill walking patterns making sure we are cuing things there, and then progressing to see if when they are running does that skill that we are teaching them in a very technical part of the practice, does it translate over to the running? If it does, great; if it doesn’t we keep drilling it until it does (although it may or may not).

I think in the beginning I was coaching because it was a show, and I was trying to get other parents that were watching to send their kids to me so I was coaching everything; it was less about the athlete and more about me at the time, and I was over coaching them. Now, perhaps maybe because I am older (and about to be a Dad) I’m a lot more patient, so I’m looking at number 1, do their physical capabilities line up? If not, okay, here’s the intervention. Number 2, does the technical issue they have, is it going to lead to injury or a decreased performance, and if it’s one of those two things I’m going to intervene. But if their power, velocity and force is high but they don’t look good, well, we’re going to do 1% changes but we are not going to undo the athlete completely.”

”With this team sport athlete that comes in for this speed profile, is there anything else you would do with them as part of that assessment?”

“We really look at three things:

Force-Velocity Profiling – right now we are doing it off of GPS. We are pulling up their horizontal force number, their theoretical maximal velocity, their ratio of force (max – so where they are at at the beginning, but also mean, over a couple of steps), peak power, and the slope of their force-velocity profile. We are looking at the data for indicators of Low Force- High Velocity (that’s easy – we will add more force and maintain the velocity). Some athletes are High Force-Average Velocity (this is a bit harder to manipulate but we can definitely influence this). We are looking Number #1 at what are the physiological changes we need to make and that’s more on the programming side.
Split times – the second thing we are going to do is look at their split times. It’s pretty simple, and I think a lot of people look at that first but for us that’s secondary. Are they able to accelerate every 5 yards to 30, or whatever it is we are testing? We are looking for inconsistencies there.
Kinematics – I want to see ground contact time (GCT), air time, step length. The first thing I’m looking at is their initial acceleration, over the first four steps, but really the first two steps are where we have the largest changes in velocity. I want to see how they manage those first two steps, and then look at top speed, and see if there are imbalances in terms of contact times, left and right, between step length, GCT etc.”

”There is opportunity to individualise but the larger the group the harder it becomes to individualise, so how do you manage that with potentially a quite big spread of experience and movement quality with the sprinters you work with?”

“I think it’s a bit like the weight room. There are things that can be individualised for athletes, and there are things that are just general. We warm up as a group, we will do a couple of high velocity runs without any kind of resistance as a group. But then to get to individualising, we are really talking about individualising each athlete’s peak power, and individualising the load on the sled to identify where their peak power is and assign the % bodyweight on the sled to attack that.

We used to do what everybody did to some extent, where you take an athlete and you do 10% body weight, or you do 40% bodyweight. But it’s essentially like if you went in the weight room, and we say we’re both going to do 50% bodyweight on the bench press, we’re getting two different adaptations because it’s not individual to each athlete’s force-velocity curve.

So one thing about power, most athletes hit peak power within 1-second and are exposed to that peak power for a fraction of a second. So if we’re just going to do bodyweight runs we are just going to expose our athlete’s for a fraction of a second over the course of a session. So our goal is expose our athlete to that range for longer exposure time. So we want to identify what their peak power is and then identify how do we get a sled % body weight to match that? What we are looking right now, is that 50% of their peak velocity is generally the range (Cam Josse said it’s 48-52% and he’s smarter than me so I generally just use the range he works off!).

We do a Force-Velocity Profile – so we do a bodyweight run, a 25% bodyweight run, a 50% bodyweight, a 75% and sometimes a 100% and then we plot that on the chart back to their 50% max velocity, and that’s the weight we put on the sled. It could be 75% body weight, it could be 85%, that’s individual to the athlete! Athletes know that number and we train on that number for two weeks, then generally re-test and give them another number. So they’re pushing their peak power exposure higher and longer and we are doing 4-6 reps for that load per week so that’s the part of their programme that we individualise. And then the rest of the programme is pretty general. It’s not rocket science, I think it’s pretty simple.

With the middle school population we are doing well if we teach them one thing a week that they retain. Yet at first, when I was a less experienced coach I tried to teach they five things in a session, I over-cued and I created paralysis by analysis, Even with the NFL combine I did that in the past. In this past year I try to keep it simple and our philosophy is built around 70% physiological changes we are going to create, and 30% technical. That 30% technical work is around the start and a couple of KPIs such as learning how to switch, learning proper foot contact (reactivity) and that was probably it. With the physiological changes, we are not going to create a tonne of more force, we are not going to take the resultant force from 1000N to 1200N but what we can influence physiologically, is take whatever resultant force they have and change the ratio of force from vertical to horizontal (at the start especially). If we can take that resultant force and make it closer to 50% of ratio of force horizontal, we didn’t necessarily increase their force but we increased the percentage of horizontal to vertical at the start.”

Just before we carry on with the Pacey Performance Podcast Review, just a reminder, if you want to come along to our next Speed & Agility Masterclass with Jonas Dodoo, you can book online below 👇

Book Online

Now back to the podcast review…….

“Scenario is you have an athlete who comes to you with hamstring issues. What would be the first port of call for you to attack with these guys?”

“This is always a touchy subject because therapists will say, that’s not your lane! It could be multiple things:

Running volume
Lumbo-pelvic control (LPC)
Something physiological – presented on the Force-Velocity profile. For example, we see a lot of guys with super high velocity have very low horizontal force outputs, especially in the beginning. We are noticing in some of our middle school athletes who are velocity orientated, we see these kids complaining about soreness in their wellness scores, they’re more sore and having nagging injuries. So that lead us to ask what is leading them to always getting hurt?
Something technical – are they extremely backside orientated, are they contacting in front of their centre of mass, how far are they contacting in front? What does their hip height look like?

What we will do number one, is pull back on the velocity side of things. Most of the injuries that they are experiencing are from the higher velocity. We will still keep the velocity in the programme but we will just reduce it, by 50%, and expose them very minimally. What we have seen is that we can make a 10-15% increase in horizontal force within a 4-6 cycle sometimes, especially with our middle school athletes. If we can increase their horizontal power and get them more horizontal on the force side and still keep that velocity in tact, sometimes that tends to work out some of those issues that they might have had at higher velocities because they’re getting to that velocity through an efficient acceleration. If they are not touching on velocity based movements to get to that velocity we will tend to see a little bit less of those soft tissue issues.

All of our athletes will have Lumbo-pelvic control (LPC) exercises that we can work into the programme, and use drilling to practice hip position and keep it as neutral as possible. Sometimes we see that if the psoas and glute can’t work to keep that locked in then we start to see secondary hip flexors come in to play as primary ones, and we see hamstrings and adductors trying to do the job that the glute would do. I try to get the hip to drive the movement and I have Jonas to thank for getting me addicted to doing switching.

I’m not a therapist, I can only speculate. I would never try to work through this on my own. I’d work with other experts and ask them what they see and then try and do my part.

In terms of maximising an athlete’s time, we can’t really move the needle in terms of resultant force or max velocity in a few weeks, but we can also look at things like the time it takes them to get to max velocity. So we might have an athlete who gets to a top speed of 22mph but it takes you 5.5 seconds to get there. For a running back, we can say we want to access that speed sooner for your position. So let’s see if we can get you to that speed at around 4 seconds or somewhere around there. So most athletes we have, we are looking at the horizontal force part of the equation. We can influence in a short amount of time, the ratio of force, so if they are at 45% horizontal to vertical, we want to push it higher. We are not expecting a change in resultant force but if we can do heavy sleds, do drills based around that and increase their power horizontally then it’s going to pay dividends and it’s going to have them run faster.

We’ve seen a couple of guys that had 10-12% increase their [horizontal] force and maintained their velocity, we saw 0.15 to 0.20 difference in their split times over 40 Yards within 4 weeks. We are not really going to move the needle much in terms of velocity, obviously if you have time you can seen athletes get 2-2.5 mph faster which is incredible, but in 6 weeks you can attack acceleration, both early and late acceleration through specific force development training such as heavy sleds, resisted bounds and things like that. And that’s going to move the needle as you’re going to get adaptations to those means.

Also, in season you’ll see athletes that the force decrement over the course of a season is pretty large, you’ll see athletes drop 10-15% over the course of a season while maintaining similar velocities which can expose them to more injury risk. We can help teams track their data on speed without needing to run guys and have velocity based injuries. We can use some innovative ways that look more like special strength than actual sprinting that we can implement into a team environment from professional all the way down to high school athletes.

Just like in the weight room where we try and maintain vertical forces, we are trying to maintain horizontal forces on the field.”

Top 5 Take Away Points:

Assess don’t guess – the importance of the Force-Velocity profile
Individualisation -we are really talking about individualising each athlete’s peak power, and individualising the load on the sled to identify where their peak power is.
Horizontal force- the greatest improvements can be expected with 10-15% increase in horizontal power and 0.15-0.2 seconds increases in splits over 40 Yards when you attack the horizontal force component.
Keep it simple – philosophy is built around 70% physiological changes we are going to create, and 30% technical.
The KPI for sport is how fast you can reach your max speed – we want to access your speed sooner!

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 456

Episode 456 – Danny Foley – Using a fascia based approach to performance training and rehabilitation

Danny Foley

Background

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast Rob is speaking to Human Performance Coach at Rude Rock Strength, Danny Foley. Danny is on this episode to discuss all things fascia and a fascia based approach to performance training and rehabilitation.

🔉 Listen to the full episode here

Discussion topics:

”Fascia is a topic that hasn’t been discussed at all never mind in depth on this podcast so I’d like to go there and spend a lot of time there. So before we go any deeper, let’s keep it super simple, and I’m going to ask you what is fascia and why should we be interested in understanding more about it? ”

”The first thing to understand is that the fascial system is real, it’s a palpable tissue and it is essentially a global connective tissue that is highly enriched with sensory bodies, proprioceptors and mechanoreceptors, and it just has a very wide reaching responsibility and functionality.

There is definitely a lot of inconclusive evidence and things that still need to be more conclusively proven from a scientific standpoint, but I think there is a clear reason as to why the literature is lagging and I also feel that there is a lot of intuition that we all understand and just perhaps haven’t put some terminologies to it.

But the fascial tissue specificically really is just collagen, water and has different concentrations throughout the body. So if we take the plantar fascia of the foot or the IT band that is a much more fibrous and dense tissue, whereas if we go to the fascial tissue that is covering the abdominal region that is more of a watery medium, it is much more elastic than it is fibrous. So even though this is one integrated and unified system and tissue throughout the body, there is different densities and concentrations throughout.

The other thing that is interesting with the fascial system is that it has non Newtonian properties so it doesn’t necessarily respond to a stressor or strain in the same way a muscle or other connective tissues like the ligaments or the tendons do.

With all of that being said, the biggest priority for the fascial system for the sake of strength & conditioning coaches, physical therapists and athletic trainers is understanding that there is an inextricable link with the fascial system and the musculoskeletal system. So, I think of this like the energy systems, and we understand that we have three primary energy systems that are all working at all times just in different capacities or in fluctuating manners. So the number one thing that I’ll get pressed on with the fascial system is when are we not training fascia? I understand that, but when we are doing a 5km run we are using different proportions of our energy systems as compared to when we are running a 100m sprint.

So if we look at training parameters and the ways we set up and conduct exercise, it works very similarly. There are going to be certain aptitudes that are going to be more predominantly musculoskeletal based, but then there are going to be different layers or parameters where it will be a little more fascial based. I think that is a really important starting point, and from my point of view, nothing about this fascial approach is supplemental to what we have already understood, and on a broad scale, what we are already doing. My interest is deviating at a certain point, once we’ve reached these peaks of strength and once we’ve established the foundations from a physical standpoint, to really try to focus on these integrative aspects of movement as opposed to just continually trying to pursue progressive overload.”

”So when it comes to how you think about programming, and your philosophy, does this way of thinking start from beginners and all the way up, or are you starting to try and understand it when you come to working with more advanced athletes?”

”I definitely think that it is more so for the athletes who are already established and have already developed their rudiments and their foundations. Everything about my work was predicated on injury and pain for a long time, so I’m now in this interesting space where I’m trying to reapply and redevelop some of these approaches, and figure out how much of this is for developmental athletes for the sake of high performance and for people who have low injury histories.

What I’ll say at this moment, is that for pain and injury I think that the fascial approach is definitively better.

I think that on the performance side, it’s a little bit more of the side dish as opposed to the entrée. (Daz comment – Entrée is a French word that Americans use to refer to a “main course.”) Nobody is going to get around developing power, speed, acceleration, developing true levels of strength. But once you hit that point, and that’s another one that is difficult to define – we say, ”how strong is strong enough?” Well is it different for a rugby player and a soccer player? I’d imagine so. However, whatever that context is, whatever that number is for you and your athletes, once we reach that point, I think it goes from pursuing progressive overload to actually deliberately improving the ability to tolerate variability. So, in other words, I want to express those strength and power qualities in as many different ways as I can. I’m going to maintain those fundamental values of strength but then I really want to expose the system to variability more than anything else, because at the end of the day sport is controlled chaos! We cannot continue to sit here and say that American football is a sagital baseball is a frontal plane sport. I think that is very arbitrary. I think there are so many different angles, magnitudes and vectors that we load through and athletes have to respond to, so I think our training needs to mirror that as closely as we can without obviously becoming gimmicky.”

”I think it would be prudent to start around assessing the fascial system and how you go about measuring quality and how much of an impact you can have and where that baseline is. How would you go about that?”

“I’m working on a follow up to Fascia Chronicles with a buddy of mine.

Our goal to be perfectly candid, is to solve this question of how do we know when it’s muscle, how do we know when it’s fascia, how do we know when it’s some combination of each. I wish there was a clear and definitive way of doing this. I wish that there was something that was just tangible, and objective and measurable. We have a couple of ideas that I think are going to shed some light on how we can be a little bit more myopic in how we assess the fascial system. But at the moment, measuring fascia is virtually impossible because it is inextricable. The measurements and assessments that have been done in some clinical settings are just impractical and inaccessible to 99% of us. So what I’ve put together here recently, is I came up with a Fascial Line Assessment Battery.

Anterior Functional line
Posterior Functional line
Lateral Functional line
Spiral line

These are lines that have associated muscle groups and work in tandem together. So it is a qualittative and subjective analysis but I’m looking at basically the ability to lunge forward to lunge backwards, doing it with more of a coiling pattern, with trunk rotation pattern coming forward and then reaching overhead coming back. Then looking at a lateral to curtsy lunge, and then the third one, looking at a single leg cross-over hinge to a lateral trunk flexion (or side bend). The spiral line looks basically at an upper body rotation with the arms overhead in a split stance.

So this was my way of essentially taking those primary fascial lines, and looking at it as a functional movement evaluation. I’m not interested in scoring it. For me the way that I look at this is that I want to 1) give them the least amount of input as I can, in terms of instructing the movement, I’m going to show them it one or two times and then see how their ability to replicate that is 2) I’m going to really evaluate what I see as compared to what they feel. With the fascial system, one thing that is unique to the fascial system is the concept of interoception – in other words, the sensory bodies that are responsible for detecting how we feel about how we feel. (Daz comment: Interoception is the collection of senses providing information to the organism about the internal state of the body. The process of sensing signals from the body, like heartbeat, breathing, hunger, or the need to go to the toilet.)

By doing the assessment in this manner, where I know what I’m seeing and comparing it to what they are feeling I think that gives me a really good starting ground for trying to close the gap between those two. We see athletes that are all over the place, can’t hold a single leg balance, can’t do a lunge with rotation, and I ask them how do you feel on that, and the athlete says, “I felt great!” So that tells me we are going to have a lot of work to do! And then I’ve got other athletes who come in and move as close to perfect as you can imagine, and I ask them again, “how do you feel on that?” and they’re like “man, my foot was starting to drop when I rotated medially, I felt my left shoulder and my knee come in.” I’m like “OK!” Not only does that give me an idea of how they understand their movement in comparison to what I see or evaluate, but it also gives me a great talking point for how I’m going to instruct and improve these things. I think the ability to develop movement literacy and comprehension is a fundamental responsibility for coaches for sure.

From there, I like to go to anything that anyone would go to for the sake of measuring the tendinous component or the elasticity of the athletes. So I like to do a single leg triple jump or a triple bound. I like to do a single leg drop jump to a vertical, so essentially an RSI. And then I like to do some kind of medicine ball movement. If they are a throwing athlete it will reflect more of that throwing pattern. If they are more like an offensive lineman in football it will be a hip toss. I’m just looking at these things from the point of view of fascial integrity and the ability to produce elasticity.

With the RSI jumps we are looking at the time spent on the ground versus time spent in the air and that to me really is a major separator for programming purposes. For the fascial sake of this, lack of flight time is more indicative of there being a deficiency for elasticity/propulsion. Whereas for someone who is just more heavy footed and doesn’t get off the ground very much then we are going to have a different approach for how we are going to programme against that.

The broadest difference between this conventional and fascial approach is really more so a change in perspective than it is in practice. 80-90% of what I am doing is not different or unique to what any other practitioner is doing, it’s all the same stuff. But the perspective from which I’m evaluating it and implementing strategies for what I’m evaluating is probably slightly different, and that’s why the fascial approach has really shown its value for me.

I’m looking at things from an integrative perspective more so than a isolated approach. If we look at the history of muscle based testing it’s all isolated, e.g., peak isometric force on a single leg extension. My interest is much more on the integration of movement patterns. How do they sequence movement? Now I realise that someone could find it difficult to transition from a forward to reverse lunge simply because they have weak quadriceps. But I’ve seen plenty of athletes who can hold 75-100lb dumbbells in a split squat or rear foot elevated split squat, and when I have them do a anterior to posterior bodyweight lunge they are rocking like they are on a boat and can’t control or coordinate that movement. So that to me is indicative of lacking this integrative capability and goes to that fascial line and ability to produce and reverse the course of movement.

The second thing I would say is that all of these movement evaluations are done barefoot and they are done with a PVC pipe in their hands. So if we think about these lines as being globally integrated and running from the occipital groove coming all the way down to the base of the foot, then for my interests, a fascial based assessment needs to have direct ground contact or interfacing with the ground, and also needs to have something that involves or demands the hands.

Having someone perform a movement where they have to deliberately create tension through the PVC pipe versus doing the same movement with hands on hips often look dramatically different. So if we think especially of throwing athletes or overhead athletes, when we are doing evaluations, we want to make sure that we are integrating that in.

With the foot, that’s really where a lot of my interests start. For me, again, it’s like let’s evaluate what they do in sport and virtually any sport is going to have ground contact and different foot positions (or what I refer to as pressuring) to change the kinematic sequence of the chain.

For athletes who have had a very traditionalist approach to training where it has been very linear and sagittal and isolate dominant, whenever you take them outside of that they just do not navigate it very well.

Just before we carry on with the Pacey Performance Podcast Review, just a reminder, if you want to come along to our next Speed & Agility Masterclass with Jonas Dodoo, you can book online below 👇

Book Online

Now back to the podcast review…….

”With so much going on and so much detail, how are you taking note of all this, given how subjective it can be, so you can progressively monitor and understand if this person is improving, especially with the integration of questioning such as ,how did that feel? How does this come together into a coherent system?”

“I think the first thing is, I’ve never had the opportunity to work in a University setting for 5-6 years where I would have force plate analysis, and all of these supporting modalities and supporting metrics to help drive my programme. I sure wish I had! So for me, it’s a little more about being resourceful so to speak. But with that being said I think that the number one thing that I try and take away from it is trying to develop and continue to work on the coaching eye, and being really able to analyse movement for what it is, and the best that I’ve ever seen for this is Dan Pfaff. Watching any kind of film analysis with him is really quite intimidating! So I think that the coaching eye that despite the evolution of technology, and all of the resources that are becoming available to us, we can’t lose sight of it. At the end of the day it is a fundamental aptitude for coaches.

A measure that I think is a really good one for the sake of fascial evaluation is looking at time to stabilise. I think that if you take any specific force plate measure, we can have an endless discussion back and forth, about that’s more tendinous or that’s more fascial. Time to stabilise is kind of a unique one because it really isn’t one that is tendon driven, and it’s one that does require motor unit integration and inter/intramuscular coordination and I think that that is something that speaks more directly to the proprioceptive and mechanoreceptive acuity of the fascial tissue as opposed to the muscle belly itself.”

”So we’ve got a training session with this person for the next hour, how are you going to address that with this way of thinking versus a traditional way. Will you just take us through that process?”

“If we start this by just suggesting what is fascial toolkit as a basis for a fascial based training approach? I would very simply say it’s:

Unilaterally and contra-laterally dominant
A very minimal amount of bilateral load
Developed more around the ability to tolerate variability as opposed to pursuing progressive overload
More open based movements, less constraints, as opposed to more closed chain isolated focus
Emphasise intrinsic stability as opposed to extrinsic stability
Look more towards rate of movement as opposed to time under tension
Omni-directional focus, trying to move in as many directions as possible

There is a time and a place for a muscularly based approach, I’m never going to feel otherwise about that. Also, there is going to be a time and place when we want to be a bit more fascially orientated. I believe that moving in the frontal and transverse plane actually cleans up a lot of the movement in the sagital plane.

If we take the example of the rear foot elevated split squat. This was something that was very prevalent with the military population. You load them up and they move pretty good. When you load them up in one direction, they’re solid 9/10 times. If you unload them and ask them to move in an array of vectors, most of them struggle. When they are on the job, they are under an additional 25-45 lb of external mass at all times, then you have the helmet which is about 7-9 lbs of additional mass. So for this population being out of kit is actually unfamiliar to them. So when we are in a training setting, giving them load is familiar and unloading them is completely unfamiliar.

So with the situation of the loaded split squat looking good and the unloaded version looking bad, the first thing that I want to focus on is mechanical coupling. So I’ll use derivatives of the spring series from Cal Dietz – (check out Danny article Beginners Guide to Training the Foot and Lower Leg).

I’ll use a variation of wall patterns, we will do some sled and locomotive variations that are very lightly loaded and realy teach this concept of intramuscular coordination starting with the foot and lower leg, being able to suspend heel, put the knee over the toe and get force coupling above and below the ankle is critical. Being able to manipulate, move and manage the upper body unloaded so a lot of bridging and crawling patterns, plank push up variations and doing them in a way that is organised to these fascial lines. Really own those positions and be able to integrate.

So with the split squat it’s the same concept. Once we get past that force coupling phase, now I just want to add velocity to it. I’ll actually sometimes just under load them and utilise bands above to help them teach them to be faster in that bottom position. And I think it’s almost entirely a proprioceptive or a neuromuscular aptitude of being able to control speeds at terminal ranges and then integrate them into a different vector rapidly. I think it is a teachable and a trainable quality, and it gets overlooked a lot and we don’t necessarily put the same priority to it.

I believe that moving in more lateral or rotational planes of movement actually cleans up a lot of the movement in the sagital plane. So if we think about what is happening at the pelvis when one leg is extended and one leg is flexed. We have different muscular relationships on each side of the pelvis but then also on the trunk. And then on the leg that is getting loaded we are getting a lot more adductor and abductor when we don’t have load present because now we don’t have something to stabilise against; we have to intrinsically stabilise. In bodyweight we start working the ad and abductor group more and some of the trunk mechanics that are involved there without load I think it goes back to becoming more stable in that sagital plane when we are unloaded.”

”When it comes to pain management what is it about this fascial approach that makes it so effective?”

“The first thing is the amount of proprioceptive bodies that are located in the fascial tissue. There’s been quite a few studies that propose that there are about six times the amount of proprioceptive bodies in fascial tissue as compared to the same surface area of muscular tissue or otherwise. So I think that’s really the foremost priority that the receptors are becoming attuned to how to essentially understand and detect the inputs or the stressors that are being applied and then going from being in a chronic state of pain. A lot of time pain with movement is a sensory malfunction, it’s not necessarily a physical abnormality or deficit, it’s the sensory network. So if we can retrain the body that this position is not bad, then the body can register that and take it on that this position is not painful.

In terms of conditioning the foot I would approach it in the following way:

Getting out of your shoes and move the foot in barefoot and single leg in static conditions to train the intrinsic foot muscles
From there I’ll look to more of the rudimentary movements, A series, hop series, skip series, all of those are primary ways that you can load the intrinsic foot muscles.
The third point is foot compliance or the ability to interface and interact with the ground, in different vectors and directions of force. I want to go back to working in more of that lateral/frontal plane or transition from forwards to backwards, or transitioning from the lateral to medial border of the foot or vice versa.
The fourth mechanism is going to be the windlass mechanism or the suspended heel so essentially being able to fully mechanically load the plantar arches and being able do so without having a drop in that heel position. I use the spring ankle series from Cal Dietz, and I probably programme that more than anything else, and it’s in almost everyone’s warm-up (Daz comment: The windlass mechanism describes the manner by which the plantar fascia supports the foot during weight- bearing activities and provides information regarding the biomechanical stresses placed on the plantar fascia.)”

Top 5 Take Away Points:

Fascial system is real, it’s a palpable tissue and it is essentially a global connective tissue that is highly enriched with sensory bodies, proprioceptors and mechanoreceptors
Fascial system has non Newtonian properties so it doesn’t necessarily respond to a stressor or strain in the same way a muscle or other connective tissues like the ligaments or the tendons do.
The philosophy shifts from pursuing progressive overload to actually deliberately improving the ability to tolerate variability
The broadest difference between this conventional and fascial approach is really more so a change in perspective than it is in practice.
A measure that is a really good one for the sake of fascial evaluation is looking at time to stabilise.

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 457

July 29, 2023/in APA Blog, Pacey Performance Podcast Review /by dazdrake

Episode 457 – Dan Tobin & Dan Grange – Using collaboration and smart data collection to enhance the transfer of training

Dan Tobin & Dan Grange

Background

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast is Dan Grange and Daniel Tobin, both of Gloucester Rugby. Discover their revolutionary approach to game speed training and the challenges they face in achieving optimal transfer from training to gameplay

🔉 Listen to the full episode here

Discussion topics:

”When it comes to training transfer it’s a little bit of a slightly murky area, based on the demands of the game and how complex it is to actually understand what transfers and what doesn’t, but what’s your process, where do you start in trying to understand what transfers from the gym and physical side into a technical and tactical model?”

”@Daniel Tobin: The step we have taken is trying to understand what the coaches want from the team, what’s the game model, what way are we trying to play, and what do we value in a game? We talk a lot about the KPIs of our game, in terms of what are the parts of our game that need to perform really well in order for us to be successful. Then we reverse engineer from there into how we underpin that with our physical programme, and ensuring that technical models are in place in all those KPIs so then the transfer comes from whatever are the relevant strength, power and speed qualities needed to develop from the physical end, that need to be channeled technically into the same technical models that improve game output. So what we do has to be completely linked to the rugby programme and there has to be massive integration; we need to know what they are trying to get from it and we have to ensure that we are linked specifically to that.

As an example, a lot of the article [on sportsmith] was on carry dominance (see full article below) 👇 and how we try to influence that area of the game. So we identified that as a KPI we wanted to improve. We looked at the physical qualities that we know to relate to those areas, things like power, reactive strength, acceleration, but that doesn’t tell the whole picture as it’s not simply that we get those qualities good and then we become a team that gets carry dominance because we found that this wasn’t the case. So, it’s then making sure there is a good technical model in place for the carry , and that’s coached well and developed well, and that we track that technically in the training environment and track the KPI in the game situation. You then react to that with a bit of trial and error to see where those figures are moving, and going in the right direction, and altering the programme if they’re not. So that’s probably it in a nutshell.”

From the gym to the pitch to the game: Maximising training transfer

Some key take aways:

Training transfer is often discussed in S&C terms as the effects of resistance training or plyometric training on linear and change of direction speed. However, when it comes to team sport preparation, the aim is to improve on field performance. Within that context, linear and change of direction speed are general, not specific, qualities. They are qualities that may impact on field performance, but they are not the target task.

Operating within the S&C silo and improving vertical jump scores or 10 metre acceleration time is not a badge of honour for training transfer

Depending on a player’s profile and development stage, physical development can have a significant impact on competitive performance by impacting KPIs within the game. At some stage, the benefits of that physical development programme will diminish, and further improvements in the target task might come through improving the biomechanics of the task or the player’s decision making and execution of this skill in context.

As an example one of the important KPIs for rugby union is carry dominance. The outcomes we on the S&C staff were looking for were an increased percentage of carry dominance by our players, and an improvement in our average dominance compared to the other teams in the league.

“Capacity” is when we are influencing areas on the force-velocity curve that we know underpin or, in some way, relate to carrying ability. While it is important not to overplay the role of these qualities in training transfer, we must also not miss a trick here and underestimate their importance. The important question to ask is, what physical qualities are going to relate to, or underpin, the target KPI?

Correlation studies, however, do not imply cause and effect. Improving vertical jump height, for example, does not guarantee enhanced carrying ability, despite the proven relationship. Apart from the obvious reason that the two exercises are biomechanically dissimilar, you must also consider the law of diminishing returns when predicting the transfer from capacity improvement to specific technical performance.

The other base of our pyramid is where we target “efficiency” of movement, particularly the efficiency of fundamentals like acceleration, deceleration, upright running and change of direction. Again, when considering the target task, in this case the ball carry, we need a technical model in place for this activity. Frans Bosch talks about attractors as being the stable part of the movements that we want to deepen and ingrain. Every movement will have attractor states that are stable and fluctuations in the movement that are unstable. Attractors are the generally applicable rules of the movement – things we always want to be present. Dan Pfaff refers to these attractors as landmarks and suggests there is a bandwidth with individual variation, but concurs that a technical model must exist as a reference point for evaluating movement.

When considering the ball carry, we examined all our forwards’ carries across a season and asked, what does it look like technically when we have a dominant carry? What are the differences when we have a neutral or negative carry? The key things we found for dominant carries was that players entered the tackle zone with a discernible drop in body height (“low”), avoided entering the tackle zone at an angle (“square”) and planted their foot close to the tackle point (“stepped in”).

Once everyone around the table agrees to the technical model, the next step is establishing a shared understanding of what the coaching process will look like. We agreed to be clear on what principles we were going after in any given training session and what cues we would use to promote them. We improved the consistency of landmarks across individual players and the group, as judged by video footage. Players also trained in carry drills that were highly specific to our attack shape and in-game scenarios.

Throughout the process of achieving training transfer, the challenge on the S&C coach varies substantially. We use a sliding scale of “own – collaborate – influence” when moving from general to special to specific exercises.

We need to own the development of general capacities in the gym and get players to the point of diminishing returns. This is the pure and traditional technical requirement of the job. It is usually where the S&C team is left to their own devices. When it comes to putting a technical model together for a sporting task, we must be able to collaborate well with a coach or group of coaches. There is give and take involved and both sides need to be respectful in simplifying complex ideas from their own area of knowledge.

Finally when it comes to the most specific forms of preparation (on field rugby preparation in this case), a good S&C coach must be able to influence intensity, workload, order of exercises and work:rest ratios; and offer informed opinions on the overall direction of the programme.

“Transfer” is the apex of our programming model, when we are truly targeting the activity in question within the specific context. This is most likely to be an exercise taken by the rugby staff, but it is still a part of the integrated model.

Just before we carry on with the Pacey Performance Podcast Review, just a reminder, if you are an athlete and want to come along to our next Speed testing for Tennis day, you can book online below 👇

Book Online

Now back to the podcast review…….

‘Where does your head go when we do talk about transfer (question to Grangey)?”

”@Grangey. I guess like Dan touched on a bit there, integration is key, and credit to Dan and our Head coach, as we have worked so hard the last couple of years to effectively create an understanding of what that means, and how we act upon that. All of the coaches are responsible for a certain area, but it’s all our area and responsibility to drive the game model. Dan touched on it a bit in his article that we have got to own our area to be able to get credibility to integrate. We all have different backgrounds and education and we can all bring different solutions to the problem. I’d love to say it’s a streamlined process, but it’s pretty messy at times.”

“Talking about integration, that merges into the technical/tactical side. So on going on this journey (which may have started many years ago with multiple coaches) what did you try to do to get yourself in a position where you could discuss technique and how it relates the physical side?”

”@Dan: I didn’t use to do it to be honest. The first port of call for any coach is that you must be outstanding in your own area, in order to get the respect and then step into a different room, to say that there are a few things that are going well in our area that I think you could look at, and we could improve the rugby programme. So as an example for that. we would have done a lot of work around using coaching reviews and coaching checklists last season to try and improve the delivery in whatever area of the programme we were then trying to improve. That then is something that transfers across domains because some of the content of what and how you coach might be different but there is a general structure there that is transferable across domains. So if something has gone well in one department you can then offer that with some integrity that you can share, and ask what they think and how it might work in the rugby domain or medical domain etc.”

”How much is it about you understanding the technical/tactical coaches and their job and understanding rugby versus expecting them to come in your domain and go that way?”

“@Dan: It does go two ways certainly, and over the years I’ve had S&C coaches who did dip into the rugby domain whereas I have never played the game, so you have to come at it from your own area with your own angle. From a biomechanical point of view, we look at a running mechanics a certain way and certain landmarks and positions we want the player to be in. If they hit those landmarks and positions consistently they will perform better, they are less likely to get injured. So any technical aspect of any game should have those landmarks and positions that we look for to be stable. How do we track it? How do we coach it? What is the level of performance across the group? If we are asking probing questions around what are the technical landmarks of the [insert rugby skill] we will develop some conversations hopefully, if your relationships are good and then from there you can start to influence that aspect of the programme.

From our end, if we think we have players who are quick enough, strong enough and powerful enough to be dominant in the tackle area, and then we start probing and influencing the technical execution of that area, then that’s how we connect and get transfer.

You can’t just sit in the gym and think we’ve nailed it here boys; everyone is jumping higher, running fast and squatting well. That’s not going to guarantee anything without those other elements, so it’s all context specific and it depends on your relationship with the coaches.”

@Grangey: ”Similar to what Dan says, the main side we have attacked it from is a technical model standpoint, of how we can apply basic, sound biomechanics to these sporting actions, so we can come up with technical models that we can hold players accountable to these, and coach towards these KPIs.

”Just moving to the Game Speed topic, how important is it to understand the game model before embarking on this game speed journey?”

“@Grangey: It’s probably your primary port of call. Whether you call it a game model or principles of play, whatever you call it, it’s pretty essential if you want to go through this process of being a highly integrated programme and narrow down and be really targeted in our programme, we’ve got to be able to collaborate and we’ve got to be able to understand what those principles are, what the outcomes are there. and what the coaches really want there.

Everything we do has got to have an impact on our game model, otherwise why would you do it? We can work on a scale from general to specific but at the end of the day, we’ve got to win games at the weekend.

There are certain physical qualities that underpin that but when we are looking at game speed from a highly specific end, we have got to try and influence things that will make our individuals or team better, whether that’s COD evasive qualities or underpin the system using coordinative qualities. These players are under so many constraints in a game that their decision making is literally homed in with so many different rules, or principles or guidelines as such that it becomes quite predictable that they’re either carrying on with the system or they are beating someone with footwork. So my though process around game speed is we are either working on their ability to break out of the system doing something brilliant as an individual with their evasive qualities, or we try to underpin them to effect them to make our system better.

The long winded answer to your question, is yes it is essential to understand the game model, to understand what we are working back from at the end of the day.”

”You mention a lot about separation in your article in your reference to robust running. Would you mind building that out for us around the qualities needed to execute that?”

The article was on Developing game speed in collision sports (see full article below) 👇

Developing game speed in collision sports

“@Grangey: It builds on our ability to maintain stable efficient running mechanics. We want to be able to maintain a nice stable pelvis, that yes will transition between anterior and posterior pelvic tilt, and efficient front side mechanics, which everyone is buzzing around (which is brilliant), but whilst being able to rotate our pelvis and extend through our thoracic and fend off from different positions and pass from different positions while maintaining a square, stable pelvis.

We challenge upper limit rotation while being able to maintain a square, stable pelvis by moving at different speeds, from general stuff in the gym (as prep drills) and we work very specifically on the field, we do different plate punch positions where we are holding plates out in front with upper limb rotation while being able to run square, whether that’s running over wickets or we challenge that with speed and we are punching out dynamically, banded at the waist. Then we piece it together into different passing variations; passing over wickets, racing while completing a pass. We layer it up by going into 2 versus 1, adding different perceptual demands and try to build that up into a representative practice that underpins one of our principles of play.

For the lower body evasion qualities, there are different layers. We can start by working on general qualities of change of direction and apply those principles and we do; different 45 degree cuts and 90 degree cuts and 180 degree turns. But when we look at evasive qualities that’s a different layer – how can we narrow and home in on two or three key ones and make them better (see image below 👇). Then the next layer is how are these players changing direction into contact, which links into Dan’s carry power principles, so that’s another layer, but we are still working on one or two key components within it.

Although we might have multiple layers and working on a scale of general to specific as such, we are maybe honing on one or two strategies. We have three key evasion strategies that we know that players generally believe one of those three strategies is their X factor, if that’s the style of player they are. Even if it’s not, they acknowledge it is a quality that they need to develop for their position within our system.”

Top 5 Take Away Points:

Linear and change of direction speed are general, not specific, qualities
To increase transfer we need game based KPIs and technical models for them that improve game output
Own your area first. We have got to own our area to be able to get credibility to integrate.
Bring your own area of expertise to the discussion to aid collaboration such as biomechanical principles – apply basic, sound biomechanics to these sporting actions
Essentialism – Although we might have multiple layers and working on a scale of general to specific as such, we are maybe honing on one or two strategies

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

APA Partner with Speed Solutions

July 20, 2023/in APA Blog /by dazdrake

APA Partnership Announcement

APA are thrilled to announce we will be partnering with Speed Solutions – the latest offering from Jonas Dodooo, the man behind Speedworks Training.

As many of you will know, APA have gone on record in saying that our Vision is to be the ‘Best Tennis S&C Team in the World” by 2025. When I tell people that, I’m often asked, “How will you know when you have achieved that?”

I think the better question is, “Who do I know who will help me achieve this Vision?”

Ask any tennis coach what they would like help with to improve their tennis player’s fitness, and speed and agility usually feature pretty high up on the list, if not right at the top. Given APA’s aspirations to be the best at what we do, it was a no brainer for APA to reach out to one of the World’s leading coaches of speed – Jonas Dodoo.

Over the coming months APA will be incorporating some of Speedworks Training principles into the APA method. This includes Speed Solutions – the testing protocols they use with their athletes – which provides coaches with VueMotion & PSR Reports, the latest cutting edge way to assess your athlete’s speed and agility.

As part of the launch of the partnership we are running two launch events over August. Further details can be found below.

Speed & Agility Testing

On the day of testing, precise linear times for each individual run will be provided using timing gates.

Within 48 hours, you will receive a comprehensive data report for your 0-20m and COD performances. This report will highlight your strengths and weaknesses across our three key pillars of speed: Projection, Switching, and Reactivity (PSR). The report will be presented in an easily understandable format, including clear charts, kinograms, and figures. Speedworks experts will guide you through the report and its implications during the post-testing session.

👇 To book your spot click on the link below👇

Speed testing

Coaching Workshop

You don’t have to be a speed coach to coach speed, we will show you how!

This workshop aims to empower tennis coaches of all levels by equipping them with the knowledge and skills to enhance their players’ speed and agility on the court.

Throughout the session, participants will learn how to incorporate simple speed & agility tests into their training sessions and use the video analysis to understand what good movement looks like and how to coach it.

👇 To book your spot click on the link below👇

Masterclass

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

Setting Standards for Athletes in Coaching Sessions

June 20, 2023/in APA Blog /by dazdrake

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

June 17, 2023/in APA Blog, Pacey Performance Podcast Review /by dazdrake

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 pitch– hop & 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:

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.
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.
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:

COD is about how well do you brake and how well do you project outside of your base of support.
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.
Importance of a key teaching cue – sitting versus folding as you get in and out of the hole.
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
Importance of transitional movements to gamespeed – lateral shuffle, drop steps, cross-over and backpedal.

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 436

June 13, 2023/in APA Blog, Pacey Performance Podcast Review /by dazdrake

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:

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
Switching – is really about the coordination of the pelvis so that you can hit a hip lock and bounce out of that position
Reactivity – is like the suspension it’s like the recycling part of this action and it is highly linked to your efficiency
Step length and step frequency can both be trained!
PSR don’t just apply to linear sprinting. They apply to all movement/

Want more info on the stuff we have spoken about?

Paid Internship with APA

June 3, 2023/in APA Blog /by dazdrake

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: [email protected]

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 443

May 10, 2023/in APA Blog, Pacey Performance Podcast Review /by dazdrake

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:

When I look at my groin process, that starts with looking at the athlete as a whole
Isometric testing for the hip is an important part of the objective assessment for groin pain
Gym assessments support the physio assessments such as Copenhagen long lever
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.
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?

Pacey Performance Podcast Review – Episode 442

May 6, 2023/in APA Blog, Pacey Performance Podcast Review /by dazdrake

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:

Deceleration actions are high force and high frequency actions
Acceleration Deceleration Ability (ADA) test is probably the easiest deceleration test to do in a full team setting.
Motor control and eccentric strength are key components of deceleration ability
Quasi-isometric yielding isometrics and overcoming isometrics are also good interventions to improve deceleration
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?

Les Spellman

Background

You may also like from PPP:

Danny Foley

Background

You may also like from PPP:

Dan Tobin & Dan Grange

Background

You may also like from PPP:

APA Partnership Announcement

Speed & Agility Testing

Coaching Workshop

Setting Goals

Setting Standards

Influencing Pace of Change

Neurological level of change

Link it to something they value

Building Rapport

Customer Expectations

Hailu Theodros

Background

Foot positioning

You may also like from PPP:

Jonas Dodoo

Background

Projection

Switching

Reactivity

Projection

Switching

Reactivity

Trunk control

Plyometrics

Switching

You may also like from PPP:

Nick Kane

Background

Objective Testing

Gym Assessments

You may also like from PPP:

Damian, Mark & Ted

Background

Forces and Frequency

You may also like from PPP:

Services

Your Account

Shop Now

Accepted Payment Methods

From The Blog