Tag Archive: GAIN

1. Reconditioning athletes: Bill Knowles seminar

   10th July 2017 7:12 pm 4 Comments

   “An exercise is something you do a movement is something you feel.”

   

   Bill Knowles

   Was the title of Bill Knowles’ seminar on rehabilitating (reconditioning in his terms) athletes from sports injuries.

   The question he asks himself is “what’s in the best interest of the athlete?” This often means pulling the athlete out of the injured body and getting them to recognise their athletic spirit again.  All too often in rehab settings, the focus of the treatment is on the injured part, rather than on the person (see previous seminar)

   Once you recognise that the entire body is supporting the injured knee then your perspective on getting the athlete back to competition changes.

   A few key considerations on rehabilitation

   Bill outlined some of his principles that underpin his approach to reconditioning.

   • Rate of force acceptance (deceleration) vs rate of force development (acceleration). The latter is much talked about and measured, the former is where injuries often occur.
   • Rehabilitation (medical model) vs reconditioning (performance model)

   We are looking to get back to performance so we need to think about this from the onset (I will use the term reconditioning from herein).

   • “We have to stay professionally stimulated” as improving the journey helps athletes. (It’s hard to stay professionally stimulated if you are handing out photocopied sheets of paper with “3 sets of 10” for each exercise for every person who walks into your clinic).

   This then encourages us to think of more athletic ways to train. A good way to start improving the journey is through a movement that is familiar to the athlete. Bill showed a video clip of an athlete very soon post injury, who was walking in water with a knee brace and even did some low level bouncing).

    The restoration of athletic normal

   

   Interlinked

   We are looking to prepare the athlete for return to play whilst also addressing their injury.

   Physical literacy, athletic development and athletic normal are all linked and form part of a “training based prevention”.

   Compare that to a medical intervention led prevention strategy with exercises which mean they are “just doing stuff”.

   “Training is through movement, not simplistic exercises.”

   Our aim is “The ability to move efficiently in an athletic environment with precision style and grace.” We can “start encouraging biological healing through movement.”This exercise has the added benefit of encouraging sleeping which of course is a great healer.

   If you just look at things from as sports medicine perspective, you might be satisfied with an injury that is healed. However, “just because you are biologically healed, does not mean you are athletically prepared.”

   Bill then quoted Carol Welch: “movement is medicine for creating change in a person’s physical, emotional and mental states”.

   Followed by Plato: “Lack of activity destroys the good condition”.

   The athlete must not forget what is natural and simple (to them) so this must be incorporated into their reconditioning programme.

   A “protection mindset” contributes to complexity. This is unnatural and may add no enhanced healing quality if it compromises movement quality.

   Rebuilding the formula one car

   

   Formula one ferrari

   Bill used a great analogy when looking at reconditioning. If your Ferrari formula one car is broken into pieces, you can attempt to rebuild it and end up with a red porsche. You have ended up with a fast red car, but it isn’t a formula one car.

   You have to know what the athlete looks like at the end. “I’m not interested in restoration of jogging, I’m interested in the restoration of acceleration, deceleration and change of direction.”

   

   Porsche

   Movement is so simple and yet so complex. Many clinicians prescribe exercises and restrict on other movements because they are uncomfortable with movement.

   (I know one physio whose end stage acl rehab was chatting to a footballer who was jogging on a treadmill! That was his “return to play” assessment).

   I have seen Bill present many times now since 2011 with several practical workshops too. He has given me the confidence to both discuss sports injury with clinicians and also work with athletes on reconditioning their serious injuries.

   (It helps that I can share ideas with my wife Sarah who is a Chartered Physiotherapist who has developed her knowledge of movement by becoming a level 1 strength and conditioning coach).

   

   Bill, Vern and Nick Folker at breakfast

   Bill is a fine example of the GAIN faculty and attendees who learn from the different people and return to their settings to apply, innovate and develop their knowledge in order to help their athletes.

   I also spent an hour discussing ACL reconditioning and using the 4Dpro with athletes over dinner with Bill. This was very enlightening and will help the athletes I work with here in Devon: thanks Bill!

   Further Reading:

   • Dr Mike Joyner on Sports Science: Servant or Master?
   • Bill Knowles on Planned Performance Training

2. Dr Mike Joyner “Sport Science: Servant or Master?”

   7th July 2017 2:23 pm Leave a Comment

   “Don’t get distracted by the latest and greatest”

   

   Dr Joyner presenting

   Said Dr Mike Joyner at the head of his 2^nd seminar at GAIN. His talk covered four key questions we need to ask before implementing a new scientific find in our training, as well as interesting insights that he has found useful.

   In a discussion the evening before, Dr Joyner had revealed that “40% of medical evidence turns over every 15 years, but certain fundamentals don’t turn over”.  That means that every 15 years 40% of what was “evidence” changes!

   The fundamentals that are constant are: Don’t smoke; access to clean water; don’t get fat and be physically active amongst others.

   As coaches it is easy to get distracted by new things and ignore the fundamentals. Similarly we may feel obliged to chuck out what is working because something new is found and published, even if that is later to be found false. (Naseem Taleb talks about this in Antifragile, he calls it neoism).

   4 questions we should ask of sports science

   Dr Joyner is an expert on athletic performance and is based at the Mayo clinic. His talk was extremely useful and was an example of critical thinking. (This is supposedly taught at Universities, but yet many recent graduates blindly regurgitate “facts” based on “research” without appearing to question it). Dr Joyner went through the following questions we should ask and gave examples of each.

   1. Is it measureable?

   Max Oxygen uptake is measurable. However in a laboratory setting research needs to show a 1-5% improvement for the study to be valid. If you win a 10km race by 1% you win by 100m! Coaches are often looking for the 0.1 -1% Science can explain the big picture, but it sometimes misses the detail and often the context.

   

   McNamara’s fallacy

   During the Vietnam war, the USA decided to try and measure winning by counting body bags of US troops versus the Viet Cong. This became known as “McNamara’s fallacy” where this became the focus of politicians rather than a meaningful political-military strategy (Assuming that anyone can actually “win” a war).

   2. Is it meaningful?

   There is a good correlation between a runner’s Lactate Threshold (LT) and their Marathon speed. Therefore LT is both measurable and meaningful for Marathon runners. (I have seen this extrapolated to Judoka who have been told to “improve their LT” by running on a treadmill more. Here the sports scientists were getting the tail to wag the dog).

   3. Is it actionable?

   

   Bud Winter quote

   Referring to Bud Winter’s book “Relax and Win”, Dr Joyner said that relaxation is a trainable effect.  Therefore we can use it in our sessions.

   “If you just turn your training sessions into exercises and suffering, you’re missing the point.”

   In swimming, every turn counts, so it is important to work on each move in a meaningful way. If this (and the dive) are ignored or paid lip service to, then the performance will suffer.

   4. Is it durable?

   Dr Joyner showed a list of diets and the research that shows if they affect weight loss. Guess what? The Atkins diet, the Zone diet, weight watchers and the Ornish diet ALL work. They work IF they are followed. The problem is that the really restrictive diets that stop people living normally like eating as a family or choosing from a restaurant menu are simply unsustainable.

   Any training programme or new piece of research must be durable and last beyond 6 weeks (the length of many studies) in order for it to be effective in the long term. Think accumulation of training rather than blitzing.

   What sports science can do for us

   

   lactate threshold testing

   So after quite a critical look at some urban legends and poor examples, Dr Joyner then gave some examples of what we can learn mainly for endurance type activities (where his interests lie). Lactate Threshold in untrained subjects is about 60% of their maximum effort. In trained subjects it ranges from 75-90% of their max.

   LT is highly trainable. The increase in mitochondria means more pyruvate is oxidised and less is shunted to lactate. “Almost anything you do that has frequency, intensity and duration” will make a difference to your Vo2 max and LT. For example:

   • 3-5 minute repeats will help VO2 Max (see yesterday’s blog on The Volume Trap)
   • 200m repeats will help improve LT.

   Running economy in the other hand is highly variable (up to 30%) and it is unclear how trainable it is. (I always question the research on this: it is often done on treadmills and the “interventions” bear no resemblance to exercises that I do with runners to improve their technique. Conclusions are then drawn that it doesn’t work, rather than “we don’t know how to coach in a lab”.)

   Dr Joyner then looked at the recent attempt to run a sub 2 hours Marathon by Nike. What did they do to try and get this time? They looked at all the small factors added together. The course, the temperature, fuelling the runners, as well as manipulating the running economy with drafting, pacing and of course the shoes.

   What was interesting here was the effect of drafting (something cyclists in a peloton know) with 8% of the total energy cost of a 5km race coming from having to overcome wind resistance. In the 100m sprint this rises to 16%!

   Training in a fasted state

   

   Trained fasted state every morning at GAIN

   Sports science can help us identify potential limits to human performance too. Much research has been conducted on training in a fasted stated. However, Dr Joyner made the point that so many gels are used nowadays that people rarely train in a truly fasted state.

   People can fatigue from having low glycogen in the muscles or from Neuroglycopenia  (Neuro= Brain, Glyco= Sugar, Penia =deficiency. So, low brain sugar). People who fast and go low on Carbohydrate (CHO) down regulate their enzymes. When they return to a normal diet, their enzymes are less able to process this food.

   The impression I got from this was that that maybe we should just try to eat normally. Especially when sprinting and doing high intensity exercise: you need CHO.

   The Scientific Process

   I haven’t really given Dr Joyner justice due to my poor notetaking and poor grasp of physiology. However, please take away the thoughts on questioning research and what you are measuring.

   I asked him at the end about “Science” which now seems to be only valid if published, versus the “scientific process” which we should all be doing as coaches wanting to improve our athletes’ performance.

   He mentioned the “Citizen science” project which is about sharing ideas that work and testing them.  I suggested we have an aide memoire or checklist to help us validate what we do or discard practices that are defunct.

   His final words were “A lot of sports scientists are just data acquisition people and analysers”. We were in agreement that it is what we do with this information with real people that counts.

   Further reading:

   • Dr Joyner: 7 Sports Science Myths
   • Next up: Bill Knowles on reconditioning athletes.

3. Steve Magness on the Volume Trap

   6th July 2017 11:15 am Leave a Comment

   

   Steve his new book and me

   “How many miles should I run”?

   Is the question that endurance coach Steve Magness gets asked the most when presenting at workshops.  His seminar at this year’s GAIN covered volume and other training parameters which apply to many different sports.

   “There is no difference between 99 miles and 100 miles, but people want to get to triple digits” (and therefore earn the right to wear the hair shirt and flail themselves). The same applies to team sports with soccer players trying to run 11km in one session because someone told them that’s what they do in a match.

   Steve gave two main reasons for this behaviour:

   1. It’s human nature to be obsessed with volume. It’s the simplest thing we can measure, so let’s measure it. (If people see me out for a run, the first thing they always ask is “How far did you go?” never “How fast did you run?”).
   2. We have a deep NEED for classification. It’s the downside to “what gets measured gets managed”. When we are categorised and accept a label we can then defend our label. “I’m a low mileage/ high intensity coach” etc.

   Training load calculation

   Training load is a commonly used form of measurement.

   Training load = training volume x intensity  But this is too simplistic. What type of load is it?

   • Metabolic
   • Biomechanical
   • Neural
   • Psychological

   How about when the load is applied?

   • Intensity
   • Density
   • Frequency
   • Rest Periods

   How does this relate to daily and weekly sessions?

   • Front Loaded
   • Back Loaded

   How can one number express all this accurately or in a meaningful fashion?

   Weekly Training Load

   Steve broke down the weekly training load of one of his runners.

   • 90 miles per week
   • 10.5 hours of training (I made the point that this is for good runners; recreational runners who tried to copy the miles would actually be on their feet for a lot longer).
   • 76550 calories burned
   • 25,920ml of Oxygen consumed.

   Volume has become a marker for “load” and has become a surrogate for physical stress. It is assumed the training “stimulus” leads to a kind of adaptation.

   Instead we should look at how much we NEED to do to get the positive adaptation.  For example in the weekly schedule above the loading on the achilles tendon may be the weakest link and therefore limit what another athlete can do.

   Common assumptions

   

   Volume vs intensity expressed simplistically

   Steve gave us 3 common assumptions that may be less than certain in reality.

   Assumption 1: Volume and Intensity training interact in a simplistic fashion.

   Instead there is a constant interplay that changes within each session, each week and over the longer course of a year.

   Assumption 2: Volume = ONLY way of getting aerobic adaptation.

   This is simply incorrect there are many other ways of stimulating the aerobic system.

   

   Training adaptation curve

   Assumption 3: Adaptation looks like this

   Instead, variability is the name of the game. There is a 10% rule of thumb for volume increases, but Steve gave examples from his younger self where increases were much more than this and he could adapt.

   The amount of training depends on:

   • The athlete perception of normal (a 120 mile a week runner given 90 miles would consider this light, a 50 mile a week runner may well panic!)
   • Physiological adaptations.
   • Tendon and muscle rate of adaptation: different from each other and also between athletes.
   • Bone Turnover (diet surely has an impact on this too?)

   Steve’s Old Man Strength

   

   Older man strength

   Steve then gave us examples of how he could train with his athletes using his “Old man strength” (Steve is only 32 and a middle distance runner, I really need to pull him aside next time I see him!)

   He can do the sessions thanks to an accumulated, consistent training load over time.  Younger athletes can indeed increase their volume with age, after that they can reduce it and preserve it by working on specific volumes.

   Steve talked about the psychology of volume which I have found to be true depending on the athlete. Sometimes you have to adapt the programme to what the athlete feels they “need” or at least swing the pendulum in that direction.

   He then asked us to “flip the switch” and that it’s not about

   Volume  to get adaptation

   It’s thinking about

   Adaptation and then how much volume is needed?

   “Volume is not a master control switch”

   Alternative ways of developing aerobic system to volume

   Steve then gave some examples and case studies of how the aerobic system can be developed in middle distance runners without just adding more weekly mileage.

   Recreational runners please take note: you do not have the time to do the mileage if you are running slower than 5-6 minute miles. If you try and copy the mileage plans of faster runners you will be spending a lot more time training than they do!

   Some session examples include:

   • Pre fatigue: do a shorter “long run” the day after an intense workout.
   • Doubles: do 2 shorter runs in a day, helps with lifestyle too.
   • Strength session followed by endurance work. You are forced to train in this fatigued state.
   • Ending the session or cool downs with “stuff”. For example an 800m “cruise” to work at the high end of aerobic system and get used to preserving strength at the end of a race.

   Steve then gave some examples of sessions which he has done with his athletes including the sets/ reps and different ideas. All of these worked with his athletes and in their context.

   (I often see endurance coaches trotting out a session like “Oregon circuits” or such like and inflicting it upon their athletes year after year without understanding why. So I won’t post the details here to avoid feeding the monster, but I will use some of the ideas with Excelsior ADC athletes).

   Measuring for measuring sake

   

   Forget the tech sometimes

   Steve finished his seminar with some questions about measuring sessions and how these questions can then shape what we do as coaches.

   If athletes are constantly looking at technology, how can they “feel” what they are doing?  (Luke destroyed the Death Star by using the Force remember,  not by looking at his Garmin).

   This is even assuming you are measuring the right thing. I have written elsewhere about the addiction to measuring technology and how that can then alter the design of sessions. The tail wags the dog. Bryan Fisher summed it up a few years ago at GAIN

   “Heart rate should be an indicator not a dictator”.

   Ask yourself these questions when developing a middle distance running plan (or any other plan for that matter) for an athlete:

   • In what direction are we trying to adapt?
   • Where have they been in the past?
   • Are they still adapting?
   • What is their injury history and adaptability?
   • What is the risk: benefit ratio of your programme will it cause adaptation or maladaptation/ injury?
   • Are we measuring the right thing?
   • Is that measurement what you think it is?

   Is the answer to any of these questions “You should run X miles per week” ?

   The answer isn’t to be anti-volume or pro-volume, it is to sit down and think about the athlete in front of you and work out what is right for them.  How many coaches take the time to do that?

   Summary

   

   Sharing ideas with Steve at GAIN

   I have known Steve for 5 years now and used many of his principles with our athletes. Until I met him, much of the endurance coaching I had seen or read was very patchy and full of mystical secrets or folklore.

   Much like when I first saw Frans Bosch present on sprinting in 2009, I had an “Aha” moment and thought this makes sense (although Frans didn’t make any sense the first 3 times I saw him, but I could see it worked). Steve is very good at expressing complex ideas simply.

   Further reading:

   Next up: Dr Mike Joyner “Sport Science: Servant or Master?”

   Previous:  Steve Myrland “Coaching better every day”

4. Steve Myrland: “Coaching better every day”

   4th July 2017 12:27 pm 4 Comments

   “I thought I was a good coach because I had a good job”

   

   Steve and me

   said Steve Myrland in the opening part of his presentation at GAIN. “By that logic if we put on snowshoes and walk outside it will start snowing”!

   This very experienced and enlightened coach gave his thoughts on creating meaningful athletic development rather than “by the numbers” exercise prescription.

   Steve’s quote resonates with me when you hear a lot of “strength and conditioning gurus” promoting their work because they have a good job. “I work with elite athletes” is a phrase I hear a lot in the UK. How about “I help develop young athletes into elite performers”?

   Looking at things differently

   “It’s easy to develop strength and conditioning, as long as they don’t matter in a meaningful way”.  A lot of job justification goes on with numbers being produced to show that what you are doing works. An industry has developed from this, but how about making athletes better?

   Steve used the word “disenthrall” which means “look at things differently”. We need to do that to counter the Dunning -Kruger effect of cognitive bias in low ability individuals that can be found within sport.

   Simply put the herd don’t know what they don’t know.

   Culture is largely built on unchallenged assumptions. He said they build up like a sedimentary process over time. “Assumptions are the rust that forms in the absence of critical thought and movement.”

   Steve was asking us to think about what we do, how we measure it and whether it matters (more on this from Dr Joyner in upcoming post).

   “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all”. Peter Drucker.

   Creating a culture of coaching

   “Good coaching is all about the culture you create to support your process” said Steve (Vern Gambetta wrote about coaching culture yesterday).  You can create a culture by embracing transformation; however you will come across some obstacles.

   Obstacle 1: Reductionist thinking.

   “You can’t just ignore incorrect things” and yet systems and research studies are built on isolated facts or factors. Athletes are humans and they interact with other humans all the time. This needs to be recognised rather than trying to reduce performance into ever smaller digits.

   Obstacle 2: False equivalence.

   Comparing two different things and equating them as equal. Quantity is not the same as quality (an example being telling everyone to sleep 8-10 hours, when 6.5 hours solid sleep may well be better for some individuals).

   Strength and conditioning are irrelevant quantities until and unless you can connect them to athletic movement and sports performance.

   Maximum is not the same as optimum (something I have learnt the hard way and anathema to crossfitters). Getting the most from your training session does not mean lying on the floor puking and posting it on Instagram. Do what you need to do to gain a response and adaptation.

   Efficient is not the same as effective. It is easy to get efficient at things if you try, but are they effective?

   

   hitting the sweet spot

   Another quote from Peter Drucker “Culture eats strategy for breakfast” again something I have learnt the hard way.  I have worked in a few toxic environments as well as highly bureaucratic ones. In neither situation have I been able to make meaningful change, despite the similarity of programming that I do at Excelsior ADC or other great environments.

   Process takes time

   

   Unlikely to fly well

   “Don’t throw a caterpillar up in the air and expect it to fly like a butterfly”. Yet how often do we hear of “fast track” programmes or academies modelling themselves on “what the first team do”?

   (I liked Brian McCormick’s crossover model of Long Term Athlete Development from last year’s GAIN which described the mental/social aspect of development which is often ignored).

   Steve then outlined some training derivatives:

   • Competition (absolute specificity)
   • Specific (1^st derivative)
   • Special (2^nd derivative)
   • General (3^rd derivative)

   Youth and professional training should look like this:

   

   Youth training

   

   Professional training

   Athlete appropriate training should take place before sport specific training. Otherwise the horse is facing the cart.

   Should we do the barbell squat?

   Steve then spent some time analysing whether we should be getting our athletes to do the barbell back squat. This was an interesting exercise because so many of the above points made lead us to the “concerted wisdom” that the barbell squat is an essential exercise.

   Two points to consider:

   1. The squat is a high-low-high movement pattern, while athletic movements are almost always low-high-low (or low-long-low).
   2. It begins and ends in a stable, fixed position, while athletic movements invariably involve travel to the point of knee flexion to extension and then travel away from it.

   What else can we do to load the body?  Especially for those athletes with developing and growing spines. Steve didn’t advocate abandoning the squat altogether, but he did want us to think about other ways of training people.

   This requires thought, imagination and planning. “We suck the joy out of moving and living in our bodies” (and then wonder why athletes aren’t “engaged” with the process).

   Steve is an understated individual who you probably have never heard of. He produced this excellent video presentation which I recommend to all coaches. 

   http://sofo.mediasite.com/Mediasite/Play/fce43886c4d1436b85ee1a55a990c1761d?PlayFrom=246000

   Further Reading:

   Next up: Steve Magness on the Volume Trap

   Last week: Dr Mike Joyner  7 myths of Sports Science. 

5. 7 Sports Science Myths: Dr Michael Joyner (Mayo clinic)

   30th June 2017 9:02 am Leave a Comment

   GAIN reflections

   

   Dr Joyner and me at the track

   Dr Mike Joyner is a faculty member of the Mayo clinic specialising in human performance physiology.

   I met him early on the Wednesday morning when he was attempting to roll around on the floor and get up despite his very long levers.  What impressed me was his effort and concentration in attempting a new task, no matter how difficult.

   We then had a great conversation over breakfast about long term athlete development, fundamental tumbling skills and education for those from a less than ideal background.  Fuelled by his enthusiasm and some pancakes and coffee, I was primed to learn his thoughts on sports science.

   Here is a summary of his key points

   1. Lactic Acid Makes Me Sore. Lactic acid is removed in 40/50 minutes post exercise. Active recovery does help this process, but ALL lactic acid is gone within 24 hours. Soreness after training is due to muscle damage.
   2. Sports drink and glucose are necessary. There is no effect of glucose ingestion until after 60 minutes on steady state exercise. Longer duration bouts of exercise may require some. There are many different variables including; the duration and intensity of the bout factors, and the nutritional status before exercise.

   Most studies are conducted early in the morning when the athletes are fasted, so extrapolating this to afternoon exercise may be tenuous. The 2% reduction in bodyweight due to dehydration DOES impact performance, so hydration matters.  Rinsing out the mouth with sugar can affect performance positively: it is like “brain candy”.

   3. It must be genetic. Size is the obvious example where genetics matter (I would say gender matters more) but there are only a few examples of what Dr Joyner calls “O. Athletes” (Knockout).

   

   Christian McCaffrey

   An example of breeding would be Christian McCaffrey (drafted by Carolina Panthers) whose dad was Ed McCaffrey (Giants, 49ers, Broncos) and his maternal grandfather was Dave Sime who was an Olympic silver medallist in the 100m in 1960.

   Otherwise, studies have found little evidence for a “talent gene” except for some with ACTN3 and ACE genotypes for speed. There is no evidence for gene testing in young people to “predict talent”.

   Dr Joyner said there is a lot of “lazy thinking” about genetics. He then showed a slide with the headline “There are more mile/ 1500m world record holders from Kansas than Kenya”!

   The DNA variables would need to explain: Energy systems, muscle fibre type, superior coordination, body composition, motivation, psychology and trainability.  They would NOT explain social factors.

   4. To stretch or not to stretch? There is a vast amount of evidence on this, and it is all contexts specific. I made the point that a lot of the studies are asking the wrong question. “Does stretching before exercise prevent injury?” and then tested on military recruits before doing a 20 mile route march with kit in boots. Stretching is obviously the least important factor in that context.

    

   5. Altitude Training. The 1968 Olympics played a key role in the development of this research as for the first time athletes would be competing at altitude on a big scale. There is a need to compare the short vs long term effects due to the initial reduction in training quality.

   Dr Joyner says the data on Live High- Train Low is “all over the place”. The long term effects of living at altitude are an increase in lung capacity. But, you have to keep the training quality up.  Those who used altitude training successfully did a lot of short intervals to maintain quality.

   Some key points he asked us to consider were:

   Beware of individual variation; more is not always better; give it time to work; beware of effects on intensity training and volume; recovery is sometimes affected due to a reduction in sleep quality.

   6. My programme is better than your programme! Dr Joyner showed a video clip of one of the Olympic middle distance races (forget which) where the top 3 finishers were very close. All 3 of those runners followed very different training programmes: high mileage or high intensity intervals and so on. Yet, all 3 were effective.

   The idea that one programme is inherently better than another is flawed. In strength training research it isn’t so much the number of sets vs reps it’s the training to failure that is important. As long as intensity is involved, gains will be made in strength.

   Dr Joyner then showed video clips from the “Miracles of Men” ESPN documentary of the Soviet Ice Hockey team doing some very basic “old school” training in a gym. The imagination and variety of exercises was novel but the players were working hard too. (This clip can also be seen in the Red Army documentary on Netflix).

   He also showed the clip of the La Sierra High School training programme of the 1960s

   and what 15 minutes a day can do to form the foundation that is lacking in today’s youth.

   7. Today’s athletes are better. More people are competing today, with better financial incentives, so records tend to fall. Doping has also had an impact on some performances too.

   However, some of yesteryear’s performances were pretty impressive. Don Lash, in the 1930s, set the 2 mile record of 8:58.4 on a weekly mileage total of 25 miles.

   This comparison of Andre DeGrass  vs Jesse Owens shows the difference in track and shoes between 1936 and 2011

   Dr Joyner also showed how innovation changed standard practices and protocols. Everyone knows about Dick Fosbury, but at the same time Debbie Brill, a 13 year old girl, was doing the same technique. Both of them were able to try this because of better landing surfaces on the other side of the bar.

   Summary

   In the discussion that followed Dr Joyner summarised with “Get kids out, have fun, spend time with good coaches”. (That sounds a lot like what we are trying to do at Excelsior ADC).

   This was a refreshing and engaging discussion, which I have only briefly touched upon. I spoke to Dr Joyner about academics preaching to each other from Ivory Towers without actually coming into contact with real people in the real world.  He said “That’s why I practice Medicine one day a week, so I stay in touch”.

   Next Up: Steve Myrland’s  “Coaching better every day” about creating a culture.

   Yesterday: GAIN overview and Vern Gambetta’s call to action

6. GAIN 2017: Coaching reflections

   29th June 2017 10:39 am Leave a Comment

   

   2 great physical education teachers and me

   I recently spent 5 days in Houston, Texas at Vern Gambetta’s GAIN conference. In this post, and those to follow, I shall attempt to share some of the main ideas and reflections gained whilst there. This should be of interest to fellow coaches and some to parents of athletes too.

   Opening address and overview by Vern Gambetta

   Vern set up this conference 10 years ago looking to harness ideas on athletic development from professionals with different backgrounds.  Sports coaches, athletic trainers, physiotherapists, strength and conditioning coaches, Doctors and physical education teachers were some of the people in attendance.

   By looking at the same problems with different sets of eyes and brains, many different solutions can be found. This was summarised by Vern as

   “Making connections to foster meaningful change and innovation.”

   

   Conversation with Surgeon, Navy Seals trainer, wrestling coach

   This was my 6^th visit to GAIN and the highlight for me is the intelligent conversations with passionate people.  Rarely do I get spend time with people who are experts in their field willing to share ideas and ask great questions without trying to sell me something or tell me how brilliant they are!

   Vern’s opening address was a passionate call to arms to become better as coaches so that we can help our athletes better.  This means sharing ideas and analysing what we do, rather than just follow herds or folklore.

   He suggested that deep ignorance was a problem in the world today. We should look for the blank spaces, the holes in the knowledge. The answers may be there. “The right question is intellectually superior to finding the right answer.”

   Vern wanted to us to focus on possibilities when working with athletes:

   • What can they do?
   • How can we get them to do it?
   • Do no harm!

   Beware of being seduced by data

   E.O. Wilson said “we are drowning in information, while striving for wisdom.” The onset of data analytics means we can gather ever more numbers. This can be seductive and we can then train to improve these numbers.

   Vern emphasised that we should coach the athletes in front of us, rather than the numbers on the spreadsheet. Because you can measure it, doesn’t make it meaningful (more on that later from Dr Joyner).

   The internet has become a problem: parents, coaches and athletes are often unable to filter out all the noise.

   Call to action

   “We are more likely to overcome our struggles and difficulties to find out what we are looking for when we are willing to take others with us on the journey.”  Simon Sinek.

   Vern’s concept is to create robust, resilient and adaptable athletes. His mission is for the athletes to eliminate all physical limitations.

   This was a much needed jolt in the arm for me. Setting up the Excelsior Athletic Development Club has been a harrowing process. I have started to run parent/ volunteer workshops to help them understand what we are doing. Those that have attended have given great feedback and I need to do more.

   Not everyone “gets it”, the prevailing wind is for parent driven competitive tournaments for 7 year olds and “win on Saturday” mentality. Rather than fight this tsunami, I am attempting to build something different and give hope to the future.

   GAIN 2017 allowed me to spend time with people who reassured me that I wasn’t alone in this endeavour. Thanks to Vern and everyone who attended for helping me get better.

   Tomorrow: 7 Sports Science Myths: Dr Michael Joyner (Mayo clinic).

7. Swimming dryland training: Nick Folker seminar

   10th August 2016 5:06 pm 4 Comments

   “Work on athleticism not swimmingism”

   

   Nick Folker

   Nick Folker presenting at GAIN in June this year. I learnt more in this seminar about so called “dryland” training than I have done speaking to swim coaches over the last 10 years.

   My impression of “dryland” training as commonly conducted is that it’s an Omnishambles.

   A random series of therabands, medicine balls and “core” exercises that are thrown together base upon which youtube video the coach had watched the night before or copied from “what I did when I was swimming”.

   When I would ask why they did this or that exercise, or what the progressions were I would get “It’s dryland training, so it’s up to us swimming coaches to design it”.

   Watching Nick speak was a breath of fresh air: he is an Olympian, but more importantly he has looked carefully at what is needed to make swimmers faster. He has avoided the need to follow the herd.

   Posture is key

   Posture is as important in swimming, as it is in every sport. Keeping a streamlined position means there is less drag in the water.

   Technique is important, with a common fault being over rotation which then forces the swimmer to have to rotate back the other way, creating more turbulence.

   Land training must help improve the posture and control of the body which then aids the swimming technique.

   (This is the same as in other sports such as cricket, where physical development leads into technical development. It is difficult to conduct fielding practice if you are unable to lunge low and deep).

   “Swimming chooses the athlete”

   Nick spent some time talking about the current state of swimmers physical development when he first meets them.

   Poor posture, poor lifestyle, over specialised, and a low overall athletic ability. This has to be accounted for when beginning coaching.

   (In the picture above you can see the coach demonstrating incorrectly the streamline position. Some of the kids are doing it correctly, others are hinging at the lower back to get hands above their heads!)

   Power and force production for swimmers

   When trying to Run Faster, we want the maximum amount of force produced in the minimal amount of ground contact time: we want to “run in the air”.

   Swimmers need the opposite: a long contact time to produce force, and a minimal amount of time recovering the stroke.

   Nick called this his “Aha” moment after seeing Gary Winckler present (benefit of GAIN as a community of practice: learning from other sports).

   This has implications for strength training: most swimmers break down because they are unable to maintain force production. It is a power endurance issue.

   The choice of exercise is also important: too much rotation causes problems. The rotation needs to be minimal but linking between upper body and hips for the long axis strokes (freestyle & back stroke). The hip hinge is more important for the short axis strokes (breaststroke & butterfly).

   Nick uses exercises that have the feet off the floor and have the hands and feet as far away as possible to practice this linking. These are placed towards the end of the session, after the heavier lifting has taken place.

   It was this type of detail that was very useful to me, having no swim background. I am uncertain as to whether many swim coaches look at this connection.

   Take home messages

   Nick had some take home points about specific things to avoid:

   • Hypertrophy training: no place for swimmers as a goal in itself.
   • Slow movements for pros: % of improvement is miniscule for professionals. Has its place in developing athletes.
   • General circuit training: why burn the candle at both ends?
   • Running: why do “cardio” when they do that enough in the pool?
   • Barbell snatch: causes shoulder stiffness because hands are in wrong position for swimming.

   He had some things that he likes to include:

   • Pliometrics in 99% of the workouts: even if it is only 1-2 jumps
   • Train in the gym first, then the pool: this links to adaptation/ application.
   • Weighted pull ups: rather than max pull ups, it is how much load they can lift for 2-3 reps (50+kg for the sprinters). Wide grip for breast stroke and butterfly, narrow for freestyle/ backstroke.
   • Single leg work: helps the swimmers on the blocks. Tall athletes find it hard to get down to start: they wobble before they dive!
   • Scapular stability: the cornerstone of the upper body workout. This is different from single joint theraband exercises that allegedly work the rotator cuff.

   Summary

   I had the opportunity to chat quite a lot with Nick at GAIN, I had some specific questions to ask to help the Modern Pentathletes I coach. He helped explain the start position and dive which we have since implemented.

   This seminar was an excellent example of taking an unfamiliar sport (for me) and applying sound training principles and designs that we could understand. I have taken this approach to working with swimmers previously (but without this level of detail) and some coaches like it.

   However, faddism is prevalent in the swimming world, and it is a work in progress changing this. I was able to relate this on the recent Level 1 Strength and conditioning course which had two swimming coaches on it.

   Honourable mentions to Chris Webb and Avery Adams who were also at GAIN and were very patient with my questions and open to sharing.

8. Movement and People: GAIN 2016

   21st June 2016 7:08 am 2 Comments

   Coach education at its best

   

   Vern briefing the coaches

   “Movement and people” is how Andy Stone summed up his approach to coaching. That matches my philosophy too. Care about the people and teach them to move well; good things happen as a result.

   At Vern Gambetta’s GAIN conference in Houston, Texas, there were many good coaches (as well as MDs, Phds, Athletic Trainers, Physiotherapists, Strength & Conditioning Coaches, Track & Field Coaches , physical education teachers and football coaches) all of whom had different approaches to helping the athletes with whom they work.

   Some were data gurus, some were researchers and delved into papers, some were experience based, some were young (many were old), some were ex-athletes, all had their own strengths and bias. They came from Spain, Bulgaria, UK, Hungary, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and of course, the USA.

   This meant that every problem or idea that was presented was seen through many different prisms, rather than a myopic view from one background. This led to many healthy, lively and sometimes uncomfortable discussions. But, no acrimony because this group of people left their egos at home!

   World Class Presenters

   

   Vern talking about department silos

   This was my 5th time attending GAIN, and there are always some new excellent presenters sharing their ideas, together with previous presenters showing how their ideas have developed. Here are a selection (apologies if I have left you out).

   • Vern Gambetta: athletic development coach, founder of GAIN. Talked about “Winning the workout” and “creating change.”
   • Wade Gilbert: Researcher and editor of International Journal of Sports Coaching. “Building a culture of competitive excellence”. This included how to transform “moments of excellence into cultures of excellence“.
   • Steve Magness: Endurance running coach. Always excellent, presents information clearly, practically and is only interested in showing what works with real life athletes (but says what he has tried and failed at too)! Of all the data he has collected, the most important differential between his best and worst athletes was attendance.
   • Brian McCormick: Basketball coach, author and lecturer. Skill acquisition, dynamic systems theory and Long Term Athlete Development Models. Brian did a memorable practical session where he tried to teach me how to shoot! Very clear LTAD thoughts and ideas, right up there with Finn Gundersen and Paula Jardine.  (Video inset shows a discussion on LTAD for parents).
   • 

     Dean and Jim sharing ideas

     Jim Radcliffe: Strength Coach Orgeon Ducks, author of “High Powered Plyometrics“. 3 fantastic practical sessions on warm ups and advanced plyometrics. A regular at GAIN, this really helped me refine my coaching cues.

   • Bill Knowles: Athletic Trainer. Reconditioning and Return to Practice. Bill rehabilitates many professional players, but also works with the Philadelphia Union soccer team. His thoughts on reconditioning are cutting edge and he integrates athletic development, p.e and gymnastics into his rehab.
   • Dean Benton and Grant Duthie: Two Aussies who are strength coaches/lecturers/ performance coaches. Dean has been before and utilises work from GAIN and Australia. They talked about Tactical Periodisation and how they use it with the Melbourne Storm Rugby League team.
   • Ken Clark: Researcher, speed coach. A young, passionate guy talking about science of speed and then science of agility. Great mix of mechanics and then practical cues. “There is no substitute for going all out with intent.”
   • Randy Ballard: Athletic Trainer, Associate Athletics Director, University of Illinois. GAIN regular, talked about integrating different support staff and the human dynamics within that. Very insightful.
   • Ed Ryan: Previous Director of Medical services with US Olympic Association. Looked at Hot Topics in sports medicine, including Light Therapy and Stem Cell research.
   • Greg Thompson: Physical Education Teacher. Always good theory and practical on proper p.e. (not sports/referees) pedagogy and development. I use a lot of his ideas daily.

   Practical ideas

   

   Movement madness

   Rather than just being a series of lectures, what I like about GAIN is the amount of practical work we do too. This transforms theory into practice, and shows us what and how to coach (the Why is in the lectures). The official day starts at 0630 on the track for an hour of “Movement Madness“, split into 2-3 stations. Most of the attendees get stuck into this with gusto.

   There is another more observational practical session in the afternoon, where the coaches show work in the gym or in a hall. This included “velocity based training” with Nick Garcia and 2 good practicals from Joe Prytzula on core conditioning/ structural integrity.

   However, the unofficial day starts at 0545 when my roommate Andy Stone and I hit the track and field to share ideas and practice our movements. This is probably the best part for me, as it allows us to explore and fail unobserved! An example is here:

   Informal Knowledge Bombs

   

   Nick Folker, Vern, Bill at breakfast

   Another highlight is the amount of time that Vern has now cemented into the meal times, recognising that the interaction between all these excellent people occurs naturally when time is allowed. The food is always excellent, and 3 times a day we get to sit and share.

   There is never a “faculty table“; everyone mixes together. The nuggets of information and discussions that come up are simply priceless and as the years go on, I learn as much from these as I do the formal sessions.

   Over the next few weeks, I shall be posting some more in depth reflections and link from this page. In the mean time, I shall try my best to apply these new thoughts with the athletes at our club.

   Thanks to Vern and everyone at GAIN for another great experience.

9. How to create an outstanding physical education programme

   10th May 2016 3:31 pm 7 Comments

   “If you screw up your kids, nothing else matters”

   Greg Thompson, GAIN 2013.

   Physical education used to be about function: getting fit to help with a full day’s work and then helping with the harvest. Now its about sport.

   “A high-quality physical education curriculum inspires all pupils to succeed and excel in competitive sport and other physically demanding activities“. U.K. national p.e. curriculum guidelines.

   I have written previously about the role physical education has in the structure and well being of our society . Sadly this is still missing.

   Last year at GAIN I was privileged to listen to Greg Thompson talk about his work at Farmington Schools. He also taught an example p.e lesson. Both were outstanding. Enthusiasm and passion linked with a detailed knowledge of the correct physical developmental stages for children.

   Here are some of the key points I took.  I am trying to implement these within the courses I run, and also the work I am doing with my children’s schools in Willand.

   “Quality of design leads to user delight”

   

   James coaching youngsters

   Seth Godin. The better the design of the p.e programme, the better the children will enjoy it.

   Greg (a keen sailor) remarked that his boat has got a keel. “Unfortunately, p.e doesn’t. P.e drifts in the direction of the latest prevailing wind. Quality content is being blown off course by marketing.”

   Marketing can include “academic studies” that use school pupils as test subjects (Personal note: often the actual intervention is done by poorly trained undergraduates, rather than qualified teachers).

   Moderately vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is one such wind, where heart rate is the the only measure of work done. The “dance, dance, revolution” is another. “Fun is #1” is often the barometer of success rather than what is being achieved or giving the children physical skills for life (enough meteorological analogies now).

   The one size fits all approach is great for MVPA or sports based p.e. But, the physical education specialist is an endangered species, we are on the precipice of them being replaced by $7 hour “fun leaders“.

   “The Moderately Vigorous Physical Activity movement has lead to a generation of college professors and young teaching offspring who have lost contact with quality movement. By pushing fun as  a first priority, children’s “normal” has changed.  They expect physical education to be game playing.  Hard work is a rarity.  In our high schools, teachers fear making students in their classes perspire will lead to less students signing up for PE electives (= less teaching jobs).” Thompson.

   The erosion of quality content leads to greatly reduced contact time and devalues the work of teachers. No one has said “calculus is hard, let’s not bother” so why do we do it with p.e?

   Questions you might want to ask of your child’s school or of your own teaching:

   • What happens to develop physical competence?
   • What happens to develop skilful movement?
   • What happens to develop perseverance?

   (I am delighted to see Willand school encouraging perseverance).

   Create an intoxicating physical education environment

   The Unicef definition of quality of teaching/education states that a good physical education teacher should be well grounded in:

   • Motor Learning
   • Athletic Development
   • Social & emotional development
   • Inter-personal skills

   If you add “observational skill” then you have someone who can perform “skilled assessment“.  Does your child’s p.e teacher have these skills?

   What about following an advanced pattern that is based on observing elite performers? An example being copying throwing patterns of baseball pitchers for primary school kids. This is an “error model” (see Greg’s comment below).

   Instead, we should ask “Is there a known pattern of steps on the way to advanced?” We can then set task constraints to help the child get the right outcomes, remembering that the child has a role in this process.

   

   Physical education requires movement

   For example: throwing. A West Indian cricket fielder may run 2 steps from the boundary and sling the ball to the wicket keeper, planting the left leg and shifting weight forward, rotating the trunk first, then the arm following through.

   The key point is the lag time between trunk rotation and arm movement, so that is what the p.e. teacher should be looking at first, rather than the foot planting. 

   There is no point looking at lag in the arm segments if the pupil stands face on to the target and throws the ball underarm. Instead, the teacher might create a task constraint where the pupil has to straddle a line that is parallel to the wall, then throw forcefully from lines that are progressively farther from the wall.

   They can then progress to standing side on to the target, then to having a slightly wider foot stance.

   “The idea of creating a task that elicits a positive change without having to engage in a lot of verbal instruction comes out of Esther Thelen’s research on dynamic systems.

   The goal of the teacher using this approach is to pick a task that let’s the student “self organise” to the next level. So in the throwing example, a child who is not trunk rotating, begins to trunk rotate when we have them straddle the line and throw hard.

   We don’t talk about trunk rotation with 5-year-olds, we just show them how to put one foot on each side of the line and let them back up to the next colour line when they can hit the wall from that one.  The task squirts trunk rotation out.

   This is a “dynamic systems approach to development” (Esther Thelen).

   It applies to running, skipping, sliding and jumping as well. Is your child being taught these skills?
   

   Kids learn what they see

   So much for the theory, how does this translate into a living, breathing entity?

   Greg is a great believer in using a playful approach and getting the kids to self organise. However, before this happens they need to have a “mind’s eye picture” of what it is they are supposed to do.

   • Create mindfulness: devil is in the details. Give them a why: “This will make you a faster runner”.
   • Stop the class and show them the good person.“I like to pick someone to be my “Eagle” and spot a skillful/on task performer. This puts the child into the role of observer.
   • Environment must be right if a kid fails the task: do we give them another chance to succeed? Is it ok to make mistakes?
   • Try to have contact with every child in each class : constant reminders.
   • Kids learn what they see: we must walk the talk.

   If the children are taught the individual stages according to their ability, then they all progress. This is hard work though, as anyone dealing with 29 five year olds can testify! Greg has got those skills and practices hard at developing them.

   Compare this to the games based model where children are asked to remember the rules of the game “only allowed to pass backwards, must run forwards“.

   Yet they are still unable to catch the ball without bringing it into chest, or are unable to run without their arms crossing the mid-line of the chest. Carrying a ball whilst running inhibits that development further and they will have a forlorn hope of passing that ball accurately!

   Minor rant

   Unfortunately we are suffering from cultural amnesia as the latest generation of physical education “specialists” have graduated from a sports science background and have no inkling of what p.e could and should look like.

   They may well have been a “sports leader” or “T&G ambassador” at school; they would have got a nice t-shirt or hoodie and attended lots of talks. Ask them to climb a rope, or teach kids how to run, jump, skip or throw, let alone do a forward roll and they will look at you blankly.

   One 14 year old girl at a “p.e school” in Plymouth does only 1 hour of p.e, a week. In that 1 hour she goes to primary schools and tells those kids that they need to do more exercise! Yet, she is unable to do a single press up or run 400 metres without stopping: what kind of madness is that?

   The good news is that there are many willing teachers who are keen to be shown skills that help them in their class.

   Yesterday I did a multi skills club with Willand school where we looked at throwing and hopping. We based this on the rubrics developed by Greg and his team. The two teachers were excellent at spotting the stages of development and coaching the children.

   It is possible to improve the quality of your physical education programme, it requires good teachers, who have access to the correct information. More importantly, it requires vision and perseverance.

   Further reading

   • The physical education revolution starts here 
   • The 3 pillars of athletic development

10. Worst Cool Downs….Ever

    21st November 2013 8:50 am 6 Comments

    Effective cool downs?

    You have just finished a tough training session or competition, preparing for the next bout starts immediately. Here are some cool downs to avoid.

    1. Put recovery tights\ pants on and sit in car for 2 hours driving home. (They can’t replace a proper cool down; they should be used in addition).
    2. Jump into an ice bath or tank. (The shock/ stress will hinder recovery, this should be done 2-4 hours later, after eating).
    3. Drink your High Protein/ High Carbohydrate Recovery shake, then go on a team bonding drinking session. (Rugby players are the worst abusers of this, literally pissing it away).
    4. Spend 30 minutes in a pool doing aqua aerobics and elevating your heart rate further (gentle pool work is great, but easy to get carried away).

     Some better examples of cool downs using Fencing as an example are here

    Anecdotally, my main aim of any recovery/ cool down strategy is to ensure the players get a good night’s sleep. Without that, everything else is of limited value.

    The worse job for a Strength and Conditioning Coach?

    Everyone recognises the importance of the cool down, but little attention is given to it. As a strength and conditioning coach it is probably your job to conduct this.

    If the team wins then they are very excited and want to celebrate, or worse, the parents run onto the pitch. If the team loses, then the head coach might berate the team taking up time. Or, the players are sulking and take out resentment on you!

    Best to have a plan in advance, discuss and agree with players and Coach alike. Then stick to it.

    Handouts and videos on more cool downs are included in the Sports Training System