Sharpening the Saw

Just a quick blog entry today. I have just found another great analogy for a training situation I encounter very frequently. The analogy comes from 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey. Although I found a  lot of good analogies for training situations/problems in this a must read book (one I usually use is Production~Production Capacity), this one is about Sharpening the Saw.

Sharpen the Saw

Here is how the story goes

A man was struggling in the woods to saw down a tree. An old farmer came by, watched for a while, then quietly said, “What are you doing?”

“Can’t you see?” the man impatiently replied, “I’m sawing down this tree.”

“You look exhausted,” said the farmer. “How long have you been at it?”

“Over five hours, and I’m beat,” replied the man. “This is hard work.”

“That saw looks pretty dull,” said the farmer. “Why don’t you take a break for a few minutes and sharpen it? I’m sure it would go a lot faster.”

“I don’t have time to sharpen the saw,” the man says emphatically. “I’m too busy sawing!”

This particular 'habit' (or principle) can be used in a lot of situations, but one that is particularly frustrating to me is training during the in-season.

Me: The guys need to do strength training
Coach: Squats?
Me: Yes, heavy squats. They need to keep doing them
Coach: But Mladen, we have a game on Saturday. I want them to be fresh
Me: I understand, but if we stop doing strength training they will de-train.  The game is the priority, but we need to keep training.

Coaches that joined their team during the in-season are especially familiar with this hard situation. You need to build on what other coach left and be cautious not to cause soreness due new training stimuli.

Sometimes coaches forgot that athletes need to be heavy, slow and sore (due new training stimuli), but that this  is the temporary effect until they get used to training and build work capacity. If you want to 'save' them from this, are we doing them a favor or counter-favor and limiting them in the long term?
I get especially frustrated when I hear this from the kid's coaches. They want to win the game, instead of building the athletes. They should spend most of their time sharpening the saw instead of sawing.

In team sports, due competition calendar (for more info please read Problems of Periodization of Training in ixed Sports), both processes should be presented at all times - sawing and sharpening - in different ratios (see peaking index) during different periods. If we just keep 'milking' the effects (a.k.a. sawing) the saw will get dull sooner or later. If we are just sharpening, what is use of it? These two processes are complementary.

This sawing~sharpening  complementary pair is very close to production~production capacity and building~testing (see my comment on 5/3/1 by Jim Wendler in Random Thoughts from the Training Camp). You just cannot be 'fresh' all the time, because you will de-train. You cannot 'play' all the time and be in play shape. Coaches need to start to understand the complementarity between these two contrary (at the first look) processes/principles in training. 

"Contraria sunt complementa" - Niels Bohr

Read More

Interview with Iñigo Mujika

I am glad to post the interview with Professor Iñigo Mujika whose work I’ve been following over the last couple of years. Recently, I have watched and enjoyed his presentation regarding high-intensity aerobic training in soccer at World Congress on Science and Football in Japan (see the review of the WCSF here). The video is posted at the end of the interview along with the link to Professor Mujika’ s website.  Enjoy the interview. 

Professor Iñigo Mujika

Mladen: Professor Mujika would you mind introducing yourself to the readers along with sharing some of your background and what you do currently? What do you do as a coach and what do you do as a researcher (field of interests)?

Iñigo: I am a sports physiologist from the Basque Country. I earned Ph.D.s in Biology of Muscular Exercise (University of Saint-Etienne, France) and Physical Activity and Sport Sciences (University of the Basque Country). I am also a Level III Swimming and Triathlon Coach. I was Senior Physiologist at the Australian Institute of Sport in 2003 and 2004. In 2005 I was the physiologist and trainer for the Euskaltel Euskadi professional cycling team and between 2006 and 2008 I was Head of Research and Development at Athletic Club Bilbao professional football club. I am now Director of Physiology and Training at USP Araba Sport Clinic, Physiology Consultant of the Spanish Swimming Federation, Associate Editor for the International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, and Associate Professor at the University of the Basque Country.

In terms of coaching, I work with Basque elite triathletes Hektor and Eneko Llanos since 2002, and with Ainhoa Murua since 2004. Through USP Araba Sport Clinic, I also work with several recreational athletes who try hard to achieve their performance goals, no matter how humble these may be. 

My main research interests in the field of applied sport science include training methods and recovery from exercise, tapering, detraining and overtraining. I have performed extensive research on the physiological aspects associated with sports performance in professional cycling, swimming, running, rowing, tennis, football and water polo. I received research fellowships in Australia, France and South Africa, published over 80 articles in peer reviewed journals, two books and 13 book chapters, and have given over 170 lectures and communications in international conferences and meetings.

Mladen: Most of the training knowledge regarding the planning strategies (periodization) of training comes from the ’traditional’ individual sports and it is hard, or almost imposible to implement them into modern sport games context. What is you viewpoint on this problem of planning in sport games and how did you adress it in your own coaching?

Iñigo:  There are two main reasons for the focus on individual sports: first, in these sports there are moderate to large correlations between physiological capacities, basic training factors such as volume and intensity, and competitive performance; secondly, these factors are much easier to isolate and quantify in comparison with the multi-faceted nature of team sports’ physiological demands, training and performance.

I agree that it is difficult to have an individualized approach to training in a team sport setting, but it is by no means impossible. One of my main goals when I worked as Head of Research and Development at the youth academy of Athletic Club Bilbao was precisely trying to individualize the training programs so that each player’s full potential could be realized. This is not easy, but according with the principle of training individualization, this approach must be adopted. It is a matter of balancing the time and effort dedicated to preparing each player as an individual athlete, and the time and effort put towards integrating the skills and competencies of those athletes to best work as a team.

Mladen: For example, peaking in traditional individual sports demands short period of best performance at certain time of the year, while in team games competition calendar demands high and stable level of performance over long period of months and ofter short preparatory period. So, how can the concept of peaking be applied in such situations?

Iñigo: Indeed, team sport athletes usually need to perform at a high level week after week if they want to be in contention for the championship when it really counts. Two competitive situations come to mind with regards to tapering and peaking for team sports: pre-season training to face a league format competitive season in the best possible condition; and peaking for a major international tournament such as the Olympic Games or World Championships.

For a league format competition, the periodization and tapering principles usually adopted by individual sport athletes could also be applied during the preseason, to make sure all players start the season at or as close as possible to their peak fitness. How the players maintain a high fitness platform throughout the season is a different issue that depends on variables such as time between games, travel, competitiveness of the opposition, accumulated minutes of match play, recovery strategies, injury…

In the case of a major tournament, the same tapering and peaking principles apply. How to best prepare for such a tournament depends on how well the players have been able to cope with the demands of their domestic seasons, how quickly they can recover, the training load they can take (if any!) before it is again reduced to achieve a fitness peak for the tournament. Once the tournament starts, recovery between games becomes the key issue, rather than trying to achieve additional fitness gains.

There are reports of these approaches being successfully applied by high level sport teams, so there is no reason to think it can not be done. In fact, the published studies highlight the potential for team sports to gain a competitive advantage if they can develop effective strategies for tapering prior to competition.

Mladen: Speaking of the problems and complexities of the sport games, how is one about to minimize negative interferences of the concurrent training if there is such  thing? Research is showing both positive and negative effects of concurrent training (strength and endurance). Since sport games demand mixed development of speed/power and endurance capacities, how is one about to develop them the best? Is block periodization concept offering some solutions or source of more problems for sport games contexts?

Iñigo: Most team sports require well developed speed, acceleration, deceleration, power, endurance and agility, in addition to a combination of physical, physiological, psychological, technical, and tactical factors that contribute to performance. However, the speed, power or endurance requirements for team sports athletes are not as high as they would be in “pure” strength or “pure” endurance athletes. Therefore, I think potential interactions among training contents and workloads that could be non-compatible or restrictively compatible are not a real issue in the context of team sports. 

All the requirements of team sports need to be trained, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that a major stimulus for adaptation in sports with such a long competition period is competition itself. What I mean by this is that a mixed training approach may be ideal in the preseason, but during the competitive season recovery from matches becomes a much bigger issue than training in search of additional adaptations, particularly for those players accumulating the most minutes of match-play.

Mladen: Observation of high-level endurance athlete shows certain pattern of „polarized training“, where training workload is distributed in 80/20 manner in favor of low intensity training.  What can we learn from this and how can we apply this in sport games? Are we over-doing high-intensity training? Should we add more low intensity and threshold runs?

Iñigo: It is true that most successful endurance athletes show a polarized training pattern below and above the lactate or respiratory threshold intensity. But rather than thinking in terms of “this is what we should (or should not) do in team sports”, we should think in terms of what the best training approach is to improve each of the physiological, technical, tactical, psychological and even social qualities of team sport players. I do not agree with the widely extended philosophy according to which all training contents should imitate the game. I see that as a very restrictive training approach.

I believe we should analyze the game demands in depth, then consider all the options and strategies available to us for improving the qualities players need to best meet those demands. If a player is limited by a lack of speed, what are the tools we can use to make him faster? If limited by his aerobic qualities, why shouldn’t we use the principles of endurance training? If she lacks strength and power, use the most effective and time-efficient methods to make her stronger and more powerful. Of course we also need to integrate the training of specific qualities into the team sport context, to make the individual athlete a better player, and the group of players a better team.

Mladen: What is your opinion on cross-training, for example cycling? Can we achieve peripheral/central adaptations using low/high intensity training while saving joints during the in-season or with injured players?

Iñigo: Cross-training, defined here as the participation in an alternative training mode exclusive to the one normally used, could indeed be a useful means to avoid or limit detraining during the off-season, avoid overuse injuries or during recovery from a sport-specific injury. The limited body of data available in the literature on the effects of cross-training as opposed to training cessation suggests that whereas moderately trained individuals may maintain fitness and delay deconditioning by performing dissimilar training modes, similar-mode cross-training would be necessarily in more highly trained individuals. What this means is that an elite player needs to carry out cross-training exercises that have similar physiological and biomechanical requirements to those of their sport for those exercises to be effective. But given that most team sports have a quite wide range of physiological and biomechanical requirements, almost any alternative sport or physical exercise should provide some degree of benefit on retaining training-induced adaptations. 

These recommendations, however, do not take into account the more than likely psychological benefits of performing alternative sports and recreational physical activities that take the pressure of competition or the stress of being injured away from players’ minds.

Mladen: There is more and more emphasis on small-sided games as a form of conditioning in sport games. Can such a practice yield more or less benefits if we take into consideration that more and more teams are solely relying on such philosophy and neglecting ’without the ball’ conditioning? 

Iñigo: This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that I do not think all training contents should imitate the game. Small-sided games are just another tool that coaches can use to make their players better. There may be some player qualities and training goals that are best achieved through small-sided games, but I think they are by no means the only training option a coach should consider.

Mladen: How can one implement large group aerobic power conditioning based on individual characteristics? What do you use as a criterion for individualization (what parameter and how do you test it) and do you base conditioning on the position played or the individual characteristics and why? Some coaches group their players based on the position played, and some group them on individual characteristics. What are the pro’s and con’s of each approach and can/should they be combined and how?

Iñigo: Within a team there are always some players who share very similar endurance qualities, so even though we talk about individualized training, we can always group players with similar values so that individualization does not become impossible to put in place. Most often, we can divide an entire football squad in three to five groups for an aerobic power session, and most players would be getting the right training stimulus nonetheless.

How we determine individual training intensities depends on what tests we use and what equipment we have access to. For most team sports, field tests such as the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test, the Shuttle Run Test or the University of Montréal Track Test should help us to determine effective and time-efficient aerobic conditioning training programs. 

My view is that we need to balance player’s individual characteristics, the demands of the position he or she plays in and training time available. A football goal keeper could of course improve his aerobic power through specific training, but beyond a given level, we have to ask ourselves whether that type of training is going to make him a better player and whether that is the best possible use of his training time.

Mladen: What do you think about the monitoring of the training effects (acute, immediate) as a form of feedback to adjust the training plan/program (medical, testing/performance, subjective/questionnaires, GPS/HR)? 

Iñigo: I think the more reliable information we can gather to assess training loads and evaluate training responses and adaptations, the more effective training can be. But only as long as we can deal with that information in a time-efficient manner and make sense of it. I always avoid collecting data unless I have the means to analyze it fast enough and interpret it in such a way that it becomes understandable and useful for the coaches. Otherwise, it is a waste of time and resources, and it undermines the credibility of a sport scientist. In my view, the coaching of athletes to prepare for competition will never be a total science and will always remain an art.

Mladen: And the last question – RSA (Repeated Sprint Ability). There is more and more research on this, but I see the trend of coaches neglecting true power/speed and strength work in favor of doing more RSA. 

Iñigo: My response to this question would be very similar to what I just said regarding small-sided games. Repeated-sprint ability is one of the various demands of team sport performance, but neglecting the other demands is of course a mistake. Repeated-sprint ability needs to be trained, and using RSA as a training method could have a big impact on various aspects important for team sport performance, but this is just another method to add to our training arsenal. 

Mladen: Thank you so much for this interview professor Mujika. Hopefully you will be willing to share more of your insights with us in the near future. Good luck with all your work and keep us updated. Thank you! 

For more info please visit Professor Iñigo Mujika website. 

Read More

Interview with Carl Valle. Part Two

I have interviewed Carl recently (click here for the part one of this interview) and here is the second part.

Carl shared some great thoughts on the recovery and regeneration in this part.

Carl Valle

Mladen: Recovery Monitoring is all the rage now with teams. Why are people still getting hurt and ill from training and competition?

Carl: Simple. We are sometimes monitoring bad training, poor practice design, and voodoo sports medicine.  With your experience with professional football I am sure you have seen a vast difference between clubs but monitoring is only as good as the training and as good as the willingness for the team coach to listen and make adjustments.  GPS and even more precise instrumentation doesn’t replace or even guide coaching wisdom

Recovery monitoring is reactionary and not helpful unless the training is sound and well designed. Studying bad programs isn’t that helpful because the data isn’t going to make major changes that help. With all of this technology and science we should see some changes? Where are the freaks from all of the monitoring? Shouldn’t there be a legion of Barry Sanders and Usain Bolts? Where are all the Renaldo factories with these training facilities that do blood analysis and saliva swabs?  Smith machine squats with machine lateral raises isn’t good training, so the information from it is junk data so why study that?  

Monitoring of retarded training is.. well.. retarder as well

Mladen: Thermotherapy is a dying art of Regeneration is it worth it?

Carl: Hot and Cold will always be part of training regeneration, the question what is this really doing?  Team cyrosaunas, exotic Russian hot sauna protocols, contrast options with special ratios, it’s all very nice but consistency is key. With any modality the big question is what measurable impact are we getting, and is it sustainable? 

Mladen: Well what do you use? Are you still doing a lot of thermotherapies?

Carl: I am not saying I am a minimalist, but I only use them to compliment the training.  You can just add modalities like you would pick sushi from a menu, it’s a very specific process. For example, what are we getting when we jump in a sauna? Less blood flow to the deeper areas of muscle, but near the skin will actually get warmer. Joints tend to feel better with heat as sometimes pain will diminish.  Cold is also a surprise, as the bloodflow paradoxically will change over time during and after the application. Too many people think about the application duration and effects instead of what happens through the day and microcycle.  Pain is still an enigma right now and everyone thinks they cracked the Da Vinci Code or something.

Thermotherapies do create some hormone changes but I don’t see anything anabolic necessarily but the environment is more favorable for anabolism. Let’s not think thermotherapy is going to make a major change in training. It mainly helps the tone of soft tissue. Just having more glucose is more favorable environment post training but don’t worry about testing positive from too much sugar in your latte.  Regeneration is very subtle.

To utilize recovery methods you need to train hard~smart first... I bet she just did 5x5 Squats, followed with 3x7min 30''/30'' Billat intervals...  

Mladen: Any simple tips with a complicated application?

Carl:

Ice- Acutely after injury for one day with crushed pellets and thin towel. Maximum 2-3 days if exercise is an option. Prolonged ice will spell doom and treating pain with it is a bad idea for the most part.

Cold Shower- The depression studies excited a lot of people because the neurotransmitter adaptations and changes. One athlete had a HRM strap and did cold showers twice a week for 6 weeks and saw a dramatic rise in HRV with the Kubios software last year and morning wake seemed to be stable without travel impact and CNS drop. How much was placebo nobody knows but I treat some cold and hot therapies like passive workouts to the nervous system.

Cold Plunge- Some HRV studies show some positive benefits. Cold plunge tend to do a great job with athletes suffering major stiffness from pain, but no research shows extensibility changes from it.  I believe fascia responds to passive parasympathetic interventions but muscle needs exercise. Some coaches say myofascial system is symbiotic muscle.

Hot Bath- I prefer this at night to help with sleep.  Add in some power jet sprays and athletes seem to be compliant with it. Remember not to pull a “Hall Pass” and fall asleep! When traveling guys like to hop in the tub and get the tunes going so they can get deeper sleep.  The research confirms this and hot bath’s are easy to get done. Many European hotels don’t have bathtubs and some hotels in New York are tiny so call in advance.

Sauna- Build up to 20 minutes by starting at 8 and add 2-5 minutes a week or per session if you are doing 2 a week.  Alternating options cold showers and hot saunas are nice but compliance trumps the esoteric protocols.  Longer applications are fine for some but each athlete needs to be accountable to what is their own “sweet spot”.

Contrast- If it feels good you are doing it right! Jokes aside contrast work is nice for athletes that seem to want to feel better but nothing is wrong with training loads. Training monotony can creep up and athletes need another stimulus but can’t just do random activities to refresh them. This is why advanced athletes crave change because they have been static stretching or foam rolling and need a break from the norm. Physiologically not much is happening with contrast methods but comfort options are part of a program, but no myogensis or protein synthesis is increasing here.

General- Never do external applications in the GPP unless you are doing triples or hard doubles. Sometimes I have done a few sessions of eternal applications to artificially do more for a teaching effect. More practice of skill in a short time period is helpful for a training camp or combine prep period. Access to good coaching is scarce so one has to max out the time. Still, in general you must build up natural capacities first before adding any modalities.

Mladen: You have done some interesting things with soft tissue therapy and imaging and orthopedic testing, any updates here?

Carl: One particular facility outside a major city in South Africa has some interesting imaging systems for soft tissue. Somehow they were able to digitize the body rapidly, very similar to Thermography but far more sensitivity and accuracy. Along with that data stream they have extremely high resolution MSK ultrasound. A rumor is that someone from Western Europe defected after spending time in Turku.  Since you are from Serbia Boris Tadic received treatment from Dr. Orava, and what they are doing with major stars such as David Beckham and many elite athletics competitors in Finland is awesome.  Vibromyography is not technically “imaging” but it is fascinating to see with post massage, but it’s commercially not ready yet. Like I said earlier some interesting bodysuits are showing some cool data, but are cost prohibitive unless you are the Navy Seals are using them. Myontec is a promising company but again with any data capturing device what is the impact? Undefeated Rugby teams? 4.1 combine runs? EMG is part of the imaging process, especially research wise. Tissue is not just static artwork on a computer screen, it’s a live ballet so the higher resolution MSK ultrasound equipment will rise in popularity with those in the know. Ed Ryan confirmed my beliefs when he shared his experience with the equipment.  How many therapists in the US are using Elastography to assist with soft tissue therapy or even experienced it? We need to catch up here.

Mladen: Record keeping is a big burden, who is doing a great job now with athletes and data on recovery?

Carl: You should see some people’s record keeping. It ranges from “it’s in my head” to sophisticated ipad systems with internal algorithms. My favorite is what Ryan Reynolds, the ASU strength and conditioning coach, is doing with his teams. He is a respected coach and the 2011 NCAA champion softball team certainly didn’t struggle. Just because he has one of the most progressive data systems in the country, doesn’t mean that was all he was doing was taking notes. 95% of results stem from good training design before the training and constant effort on the floor. Brilliant coach and people need to listen to him, as his sport science knowledge is top of the line. I have only met him once but I need to go back to Arizona for another visit soon to see what he doing again.

Good record keeping kills off debates because either it’s measured or it’s imagined.  Show me the numbers. At the end of the year are people better? How did it happen?

Record keeping should not be like this

Mladen: You went to the Netherlands in 2008 and Finland and learned a lot about the practical use of lactate and HRV. What have you learned since?  

Carl: Repeat Sprint Ability is diluted with many teams to the point that I am under the belief that we are overthinking conditioning to the level of being foolish. Speed and other relatives of it need to be compared properly. This is why I think more 15m dash times need to be tested fresh to see what people are capable of. Remember the average “speed” of some of these repeat “sprints” are slower than high school JV hurdlers over one barrier! If you want more ketchup get more tomatoes, not add more tomato juice.  Elite soccer is played in two time periods split in half with rest, not 90 minutes straight, so some sport scientists forget to adjust to the fact that the game does allow for some internal recovery. Condition only enough to keep acute power drops from occurring and to support practice and immune health. Nothing more. RSA is about Repeat Sprint Ability and not Repeat Slow Ability.

HRV is tricky because no matter what you use it’s an estimate of total load.  Some of the studies of parasympathetic reactivation smells like some of the electrical discussions that Coach Francis had 7 years ago, but let’s be honest here. HRV is one data stream and only a few set-ups are doing live acquisition during sprints.  Analyzing post game is going to get fatigue, but after each sprint is a nice feature because it helps performance more. Monitoring recovery helps decide what to do, but monitoring training helps getting better.

Lactate scores is not a magic number generator as clearance rate is important. When I see low lactate scores after slow sprints, I don’t see sprint capacity I see endurance volume interference and the smell of “fitness coaches”. On the other hand doing too much power work will create a Ferrari with a transmission ready to blow since team sports are not track meets and need more conditioning.  What is optimal is unique to the program and the athletes being trained. Team chemistry is important and one has to think that Kobe Bryant (Knee degeneration) spending time on the bench instead of practice could be an example with some need for more experimentation. Everyone preaches individualism at coaching conferences but I don’t see the tailoring when I visit.

Mladen: Sleep is talked about, what aspects of interventions seem to work best for you? How do you visualize sleep data yourself?

Carl: The metrics of sleep from a hypnogram are going to be trendy but relationships and honesty between coaches and athletes will trump the data crunchers. I am more interested in the Data Benders, those that improve outcomes than those that show scatterplots of failed training experiments.  Actigraphy and products like www.myzeo.com are good ways to create hypothesis of interventions but usually the athletes that are not compliant with the data capturing are the ones that need the interventions! No matter how great the biomechanical data collection or supplement protocol is, many professional athletes are passed out in the back of a Hummer Limo before game day from massive “ethanol battles”.  Does the blood panel after game day calculate that? We need more Tony Dungy coaches that are able to make a connection with people and coaches that seem like second fathers. Those are the true masters.

After some reduction in fiestas and stability is created, a constant sleep and wake time is the strongest way to improve sleep besides good training loads. One can do REM and other sleep scoring methods but most of the impact is gong to come from precise loading, stimulant and alcohol reduction, and good sleep hygiene. Add in a hot bath and massage here and there and now you are doing something special.

Get consistent first, then worry about the rest. First things come first.

Mladen: Nutrition is always going to be a focal issue with athletes but what do you use? Anything besides the tips one usually sees in articles?

Carl: My nutrition information isn’t going to be earth shattering but the tricks of the trade is what KPI like variables one can change. First buying custom wide mouth water bottles with measurement lines is paramount. Add in a team logo and color of choice now we are getting somewhere. The wide mouth cap allows for protein powders to be used.

After the basics are covered I stick to the 3 meals and 3 snack philosophy since athletes simply don’t have the time to cook. 45 minute desert recipes?  Who does that? Athletes need explicit shopping lists and restaurant suggestions and how to budget money. Some coaches even scan grocery receipts.

Buy fishoils, protein powders, creatine, and functional foods in 90 day orders every 80 days or so. Only a handful of supplements work so save your money on things like dried fruit, lean protein sources, and fresh fruits and vegetables. Protein powders are vital as they save money and are portable. Again three meals only- what people usually do as athletes is much different than physique people. Bodybuilding has a lower frequency of training so more meals is not practical with many athletes unless they live at a training center. Digestion is a real issue so sometimes GES and bars are helpful.

Mladen: You have spent some time with some exceptional therapists and coaches learning what works and what is not very useful or significant. Anything the readers would want to get to shed some light on regeneration?

Carl: If people wish to know more about what world class therapists are doing and what coaches are doing in case studies. They can email me at carlfvalle@gmail.com if they want to join a small group of coaches that crowd source money for some great educational mini courses in mediacast format.

Read More

Reprint of the interview with myself done by Robbie Bourke

This is my first interview done by Robbie Bourke from October 2010. I wanted to reprint it over here because I think it is pretty good (thanks Robbie).



1. Mladen thank for your time. Could you give my readers your background, and how you came to be a strength and conditioning coach?

First of all, thank you for the interview Robbie. It makes me really proud that there are people that are interested in what I do, say and think.

In short, I decided to enter the Faculty of Sports and Physical Education at University of Belgrade, Serbia after I did years of computer programming and after I finished Technical High School in Pula, Croatia. I wanted a 180 degree turn. Somehow, I was always kind an athletic, but I never pursued athletic career in any sport, mostly for the fact that I got my glasses at age of 12 or 13. I had, and I still have huge interest in martial arts, although weightlifting and strength training in general are catching up lately. I am still trying to find out what motivated me to do a jump from IT to coaching. I guess I always wanted to see people improve and I always wanted to understand what are the factors and causes of being really good at something. Having a good background in problem solving while being a young programmer and being athletic for some reason strange to me and without any real in-depth specific knowledge of any sport in particular (both about-sport and in-sport), I decided that more ‘general’ career of strength and conditioning coach is right for me. Since we lacked a strength and conditioning program at my Faculty, couple of us students at the time started collecting signatures and interests and demanding such a program. Finally, the Faculty opened the strength and conditioning program. Since we were among the first students to enter it and also a generation of students that was there during changing times at the Faculty, the strength and conditioning program was a disaster.

Then I decided that in order to learn I need to trust myself in acquiring the knowledge and not wait for the knowledge to be served to my table. I decided to learn English and read all the books I could get my hands on (and back at that time, ordering books and DVDs from USA was really complex and expensive). The first ones I read were “Life Science Physics” and “Neuromechanics of human movements” by Enoka . The former is an old book on mechanics and physics in general for students of biology, medicine and life sciences in general. I read it with the glossary and it was painful. But, those particular books gave me a lot of scientific background and I started learning English. I remember reading “Low Back Disorders” by Stuart McGill, in which he referenced “Supertraining” by late Mel Siff. I somehow acquired a copy of Supertraining and started lifting while reading it. I guess the book imprinted a critical thinking in me, although it wasn’t a very practical book. Afterwards I started reading everything and practicing on my own and with other students and friends.

I remember entering late Charlie Francis’ forum by a recommendation of my really good friend Jovan Buha and the rest is history. As I already mentioned, getting books and DVDs to Serbia was really problematic, so couple of coaches sent me their material for free, and I just wanted to say thanks because they helped me a lot. Some of them include Charlie Francis, Mike Boyle, Tim Noakes and Martin Rooney. I have also got a free copy of the new book by Keith Davids and I wanted to thank him one more time using this opportunity.

That was about theory. My first practical experience came with Partizan Basketball Club. I was doing an internship with cadet’s part of the club while still studying . Our supervisor was Professor Vladimir Koprivica, a former student of the legendary Dr. Leonid Matveyev, who did his best to educate the “lost” students from the strength and conditioning department.

My first professional job was a head strength and conditioning coach for Football Club RAD from Belgrade. That was a real awakening from student dreams. Afterwards I went to tennis, soccer again and finally volleyball where I was working with some of the best volleyball players in the world, one of whom was famous Serbian volleyball player Vladimir Grbić who is my very close friend and was actually my boss during the last season in volleyball club Klek from Zrenjanin, Serbia.

I am currently residing in Cambridge, MA after I finished my summer internship at Mike Boyle Strength and Conditioning facility in Woburn, MA.

2. What, in your opinion, is the biggest problem you see in the strength and conditioning industry?

First, it is the name. This is not an industry.

Second, it is the ideological dogmatic methodology, where everyone is jumping from band wagons every couple of years. German philosopher Hegel explained this by thesis-antithesis-synthesis triad. There is nothing new under the Sun and some methods are known from since Ancient Greece and longer. So, instead of trying to sell certain method or new exercise or coaching gimmick, strength and conditioning coaches should spend more time understanding the context under which certain methods, loads and exercises produce results for a specific individual under specific circumstances. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing bad in trying to make a living, but I guess we are doing it in a very superficial and a wrong way. Instead of being fascinated with *new* methods, revolutionary exercises and gimmicks, one should try to see the big picture and don’t get lost in the details. We are working with people (says a guy who spend a lot of time programming), and trying to understand them and their motivation, goals and circumstances, developing your own coaching philosophy and personal skills can yield more results than getting TRX, kettlebell or whatever certification.

Third, it depends on the country and sport I guess. Certain environmental constraints, like culture, economics and politics can have great impact on overall sporting problems including strength and conditioning.

And as a side note, I was just talking with my roommate and friend Cem Kantarci, a wise Turkish guy and my common-sense advisor, about the curse of strength and conditioning. The curse is very simple: we, strength and conditioning coaches, or the term I love more – physical preparation specialists, are not stand-alone coaches. We need to be part of the coaching staff. We need to have huge general knowledge about all aspects of sporting preparation and specific knowledge in physical preparation, but our work is only being assistant and advisor (unless you train personal clients). We are always going to be ‘second’ and we are always going to work in the shadow of the head coach. Thus, a great deal in being a good physical preparation specialist is having a good coaching staff environment and being a part of really good coaching team. For being unable to be the “main man”, strength and conditioning coaches bitch about how important we are and stuff. Well, we are not and that is the curse. I wish one day I become a head coach in one sport so I could make all the decisions and stuff, but till then we need to suck it up, improve our communication skills and accept our multi-disciplinary role and stop selling gimmicks to show the world how smart and important we are, because we are not.

3. You are a very well read individual on periodization for strength training and conditioning. What in your opinion is the optimal periodization scheme for an experience field or court player?

There is none. It depends on the three constraints: athlete level, goals and context. People are forgetting about the importance of the context and trying to analyze certain methods taken out of it. This is why I said it is more important to understand those constraints and the solutions they demand, than trying to say what better or worse method is taken out of context. For sure, every method has its pros and cons, yet those three constraints I mentioned will demand specific solutions. Everyone is trying to find out whether complex-parallel periodizazion is better than block periodization and such. Well, here is the truth – when we stop using either/or logic and starting thinking more both/and and using more critical, pragmatic, and complementary thinking we are going to understand that there is no good and bad. There are only optimal solutions for certain problems under certain contexts.

Periodization can get so complex. Get it simple!

4. Who has had the biggest influence on you as a coach?

Charlie Francis. I feel very sorry for not ever being able to meet him in person, since he died in May this year.

The late Charlie Francis

 5. What are you all-time favorite books in the following areas:
 
Uh-oh. Hard question. As the saying goes, it is not so much important what to read, but what not to read. There is an abundance of information these days and we need to develop certain ‘filters’ for all the info out there and really select good sources out of a lot of mediocre or wrong ones. I could probably type a bunch of books, but I will try to keep the number of them to minimum.

- Strength Training: Well, this is hard. For theory I would suggest Supertraining by Siff, Strength and power in sport by Komi and Science and Practice of Strength Training by Zatsiorky. Practical books would probably be Practical Programming by Rippetoe, The Coach's Strength Training Playbook by Joe Kenn and books and articles by Christian Thibaudeau, Charles Poliquin and other. I said it is really hard.

- Physical Therapy Rehabilitation: Clinical Sports Medicine by Brukner and Khan. A must have handbook for strength and conditioning coaches. We need to stop thinking we need and can do other people’s work, yet we need a general overview and this book is a great choice.

-Nutrition: Everything by Lyle McDonald. His free articles are real gems and far better than expensive books out there. You can check his materials at www.bodyrecomposition.com

-Business: I am starting to learn more about this field. Mark Young recommended me E-Myth. Haven’t checked this one yet, to be honest.

-Random: I just read Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. Although some of the critiques say he cherry picked his examples I think he is onto something.


6. We have often heard Coach Boyle ask “How strong is strong?” How strong is strong in your opinion?

Again it depends. I agree that athletes need to be athletes first and then basketball players, soccer players, etc second. This is why they need a certain general level of strength to begin with. Anyway, even from this general strength level we expect certain transfer to the field and injury prevention, yet the forces experienced in the event demands different levels of general strength levels and different levels of general and specific strength training. Compare table tennis and volleyball. Do they need same general strength levels? But do they need certain amount of general physical preparedness and athleticism? For sure!

Also, if we check the real world strength levels of the team sport athletes, for example rugby players provided by Dan Baker’s research papers we can see that they are not that high, at least not as high as you can see on YouTube videos. This doesn’t mean that we need to stop working on this, it just means that some other things are more important, like team work, technical skill, decision making, etc. I kind of follow basic strength recommendations by Kelly Baggett and I cannot wait for his new version of Vertical Jump Bible.

Some numbers I am personally aiming at as a good strength levels (not in the case of ordinary team athletes) are:

Clean: 1.5 x BW

ATG Squat: 2.0-2.5 x BW

Dead Lift: 2.5 – 3.0 x BW

Bench Press: 1.5 x BW

Chin-Ups: 1.5 x BW x 5reps



7. Sometimes there seems to be a huge gap between some physical therapists and strength and conditioning coaches. How in your opinion can this gap be bridged?

In my opinion strength coaches should do their job and stop putting their nose in other people’s work. We do need to know the basics, but for the pure lack of time, we cannot know everything in enough depth to be experts at everything. This is why I said earlier that strength and conditioning coaches are part of the coaching staff, and providing a good coaching team with the head coach in charge, good communication and good recruitment of coaches that work as a team is a way to bridge this gap. It is not what you know, but who you know in this case. We need to appreciate other peoples work and they need to appreciate our work.


8. Theres has been a lot of talk lately about doing some ‘aerobic’ type circuits to elicit certain hypertrophy adaptations to the left ventricle of the heart to help improve cardic output during certain activities, and to help recovery in between high intensity bouts. What in your opinion would be the most ideal to incorporate this idea into a strength and power athletes program?

My opinion on this is that this lately CO discussions, although a nice breath of fresh air (or just a phase in thesis-antithesis-synthesis triad) are reductionistic in it’s nature. The question is what is the best method of improving CO and whether it is improving only this factor. Old training wisdom suggested that long duration low intensity training improve oxygen uptake in skeletal muscle and intervals improved oxygen transport (heart stroke volume). During the ‘80s the ideas reversed, but the new research is showing that older ideas are correct. You can check more on this in Lyle McDonald series of articles on endurance:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/methods-of-endurance-training-part-1.html
 
So, instead of using reductionistic approach, my quest is to find a nice fit between organism~environment. We do need to understand basic functioning of the parts of the system, but knowing where the certain bolt in the car is will not teach us how to drive the same car in the traffic. In this sense, we need to figure out what the types of demands are placed from the environment to the organism (athlete) and vice versa.
Incorporating some of those ideas in strength and power program would demand analysis of the organism~environment. Also, this comes to importance of low intensity work (both specific and non-specific) with the aim at improving specific and general work capacity of the lifter. In more practical term, this would mean smart planning and utilization of low intensity modalities in a certain days or certain parts of the year. If I remember correctly Mike Tuchscherer provided some nice example in his Reactive Training Manual regarding planning strategies for improving work capacity. This may also include low intensity specific work, or general work like jogging, swimming, etc. Again, it depends.


9. Could you give my readers a basic summary of what your methodology on strength training is (eg. how do you assess, design, and periodize programs)?

I try to fit the training to the individual needs, his level and context at hand. Also, I am experimenting with using auto-regulatory training to allow and teach athletes to modify their own training, make decisions and be responsible and partly in charge of their own training. In my opinion, allowing athletes to chose/modify training will promote autonomy, increase opportunities to feel competent and hence lead to enhanced intrinsic motivation. Autonomy, complexity/mastery and purpose; three things that make 'work' or training enjoyable. For this sole reason, I am interested into individualization in team settings, and using RPE and other subjective indicators in planning and monitoring training.

For further info on this I suggest interested readers to check some of my articles that are available on-line soon at my blog: complementarytraining.blogspot.com

10. If you could chose one exercise and on exercise only, what would it be and why?
Squats. Probably because they have the biggest carry-over to sporting activities. And because I like them

Back squats baby!

11. Last question, what advice would you give to young coaches getting into the field?

Get the basics first. Learn about mechanics, physiology and psychology. Basics are basics. Start doing internships and coaching soon and start training (walk the walk, talk the talk – practice what you preach). Also, continue pursuing coaching skills in the sport of your choice at the same time because you may not like the career path of strength and conditioning. Be selective about what you read and try to develop critical thinking.

Read More

Random thoughts from the training camp. Part 2

Recently, we went on two training camps (the first one was on Mountain Tara, and the second one was in Stara Pazova, in the national team state of the art facility). I’ve been pretty busy lately and unable to blog due all that training and travel. Anyway, here is the second part of random thoughts from training camps.

Strength training

            I’ve been reading Dan Baker’s articles regarding strength training and conditioning and I have found one old one (from 1994) especially interesting: Periodization: The Effect on Strength of Manipulating Volume and Intensity. 

            One of the conclusions of this paper was that:

Over a short training cycle, non-periodized strength training results in the same gains as does linear and undulating periodized strength training, when training volume and relative intensity are equated

This non-periodized strength training is simple 5x6 training program, where linear is 5x10 to 3x3 (please read the full article). This 5x6 is very similar to Starting Strength 3x5 or Bill Starr’s 5x5 which are both non-periodized (for more info please read Planning the Strength Training articles). The question is what is the rationale behind more complex rep/set alternations (or Cycle-Length Variants as Dan Baker use to call them)? I think I gave pretty much extensive answer to that question in Planning the Strength Training and What the Heck is Periodization Anyway, but I would love to present another ‘paradigm’ behind it. 

Why would one need to progress from 10 reps to 3 reps, when doing a simple non-periodized strength program may yield same training effect (over a short cycle for beginner/intermediate athletes)? If we take ‘repetition continuum’ (anatomic adaptation zone, hypertrophy zone,  relative strength zone) out of equation, I think that we are dealing with training potential (please take a look at SST: Manual for Coaches) of certain percentage of 1RM. From the principle of using  the least amount of training load to bring up the adaptation, the beginner and someone coming from off-season will yield same (or almost the same) adaptations (in terms of strength improvement) by utilizing the 70% or 95% of 1RM, while the 70% will be a lot safer and done with better technique. The greater the intensity/intensiveness the quicker the results, but also the quicker the stagnation and shorter the residual training effects. Easy come, easy go. Just my 2 cents on the issue.

Training potential of different training means

 

Another interesting topic is intensiveness of training and build~test concept. In short, intensiveness is how hard the set feels or should I say proximity of failure or true RM (repetition maximum) and it is usually expressed as RPE number. Training programs utilize certain Cycle-Length variations that ‘plays’ with loading parameters (intensity, reps, sets, volume, rest, etc), but I guess the real rationale behind is the progression in intensiveness even for non-periodized programs (like 5x5, where once you stagnate you reduce the intensity for 20% and start all over, for example).

First you start easy, you build and you peak. Rinse and repeat. If you keep pushing it, you will need to do training for the broken. What I want to say is that on the fundamental level programs progress from easy to hard. These are intensiveness concepts. 

Progression in intensiveness

 

This concept goes pretty well with every training program out there. Take 5/3/1 for example. You start easy with 10% reduction in your 1RM. Even if the last set for key movement is usually done for max reps (RPE 10), this can be ‘cycled’ too, by “picking up your battles” (as stated by Jim Wendler in the new 5/3/1 for Powerlifting).  When you start to struggle, you reduce 1RM for 10% and start all over. Rinse and repeat. You cannot force adaptation, you need to take it into account. 

The point being taken here is that we have certain ‘limited energy’ for doing intensive work before we burn-out and stagnate. I think this is substance principle of all form programs (substance~form complementary pair) and it is principle behind all training programs (construct in construct~constraints). The question is how this fundamental principle evolves as the lifter advances and how it affects his planning (based on his level). For example, beginners can do intensive training for all exercises in certain workout. Intermediates need to pick their battle within the workout in terms which exercise(s) are they going to push real hard. Advanced need to do that too, but also needs to choose during what days are they going to do it.  Elites have short periods during which they are able to spend their ‘limited energy’ to push key exercises. More on this can be found in Planning the Strength Training.

In my opinion this can be applied to Build~Test complementary pair. Building strength and testing strength is not the same. As Jim Wendler said, if it was the same, then all you would need to do is do a meet every day. Smart guy that Jim. And strong. Damn strong. 

Building strength demands certain volume and less intensiveness. Please note that I didn’t say less intensity, but lower intensiveness. Lower intensiveness will allow you more volume. Testing strength demands very small volume and high intensiveness. Both processes are important and complementary.  

At the end of  the mentioned article, Dan Baker stated that: 

Training volume appears to be an important training variable for developing LBM and muscular strength. Prolonged high intensity/low volume  training should be avoided.

If we consider training intensity as the most important criteria in terms of what adaptation is seen (training effect and training potential): hypertrophy, anatomic adaptation, maximum strength, relative strength, power, etc then we are left with a combo of intensiveness and volume to manipulate recovery, maintenance, build and test of preparedness. I think this can be applied to all training types besides strength only, like energy system development (build~test of aerobic energy system, glycolytic system, etc). 

Like Socrates, I am struggling to find the Truth, or unifying principles (of construct~constraints, biology of adaptation and training programs ) that are common to all good programs out there…

Socrates

World Congress for Science and Football

            I recently came across this by reading Carl Valle’s blog and Mark Upton’s website. I have downloaded most if not all videos from wcsf2011 YouTube Channel and I am watching one presentation after another. 

 

I have seen presentation by Inigo Mujika and Mark Williams and they are really good. Other articles that go well with William’s presentations are Lyle McDonald series on Talent~Work and a short article by The Science Of Sport. 

The SWITCH

I have just finished this book that I waited for a long time. It is an easy read and provides some great ideas how to induce change in team sport settings among everything else without using carrot~sticks. It goes pretty well with the Drive.  I am contemplating how to utilize it within my club settings at the moment. Really good book that you should read. 

Read More

Random thoughts from the training camp. Part 1

I am currently at the training camp (pre-season) with FC RAD getting ready to play UEFA Europa League qualifications starting from July 1st. We have a new head coach who is German-school coach, very pedantic and systematic. I really love his style and I think I am going to learn a lot when it comes to solutions of combining small-sided games (SSG) and technique/running polygons with the aim of developing aerobic capacity/power along with overall coaching philosophy. My role, at the moment is warm-up, cool-down, individual work with players and strength training.  I am not involved in planning/programming like with ex head coach Marko Nikolić, thus I am accepting this new apprentice role and trying to learn as much as I can and to help players and team to be physically prepared for the demands of competitions and training.

Anyway, I train myself couple of times per day, since I don’t need to think about food preparation, cleaning and stuff. All I do is coach, train myself, read, eat and sleep. I have found some time to write down this blog entry.

Good Cop~Bad Cop

            In our first meeting, the new head coach clearly stated that to form cohesive group of players, one need the enemy, someone that repels players into cohesive unit. This strategy was also used in communistic counties where government invented the enemy of the country so does the citizens would be more cohesive. In this case, head coach is the enemy. We, assistance coaches and other stuff member should be good cops in this relationship with the players. 

Good cop~Bad cop

 

Testing vVO2max (MAP)

            Before we started the training camp we did laboratory testing to find out:

1.      vVO_2max (velocity at VO2max)

2.      VO_2max (peak oxygen uptake)

3.      vVT (velocity at second ventilatory threshold)

4.      HR_max (maximal heart rate)

5.      HR_VT (heart rate at ventilatory threshold)

Although the optimal test for each parameter was slightly different, the testers we hired decided to pick up the following test since the vVO_2max and vVT were the most important parameters to be found. If you are interested in vVO_2max you can find more info here.

The protocol consisted of treadmill running at 0 or 1 degrees, starting from 10kmh^-1 and increasing the speed every minute for 1kmh^-1 until exhaustion or VO_2max platoue.

Most of mine players showed pretty low VO_2max of 52 mLkg^-1min^-1 on average, but rather high vVO_2max  of 18 kmh^-1 on average and pretty high vLT of 15 kmh^-1.

I have checked the results in the literature and what I found is that they are test-dependent. For example, in the study by Bragada et al. they showed that 3,000m male runners have around 70 mLkg^-1min^-1, 19,8 kmh^-1 vVO_2max  and 17,7 kmh^-1  V4 (or velocity at 4mmol lactates which should correlate to ventilator threshold). Are my guys super-efficient, or something else? The protocol in this study consisted of incremental protocol similar to the one we did, but the speed increased every two minutes compare to our one minute.

In the study by Gaeini el al. they utilized the same protocol as we did and the results were close enough to ours (58 mLkg^-1min^-1 VO_2max and 19,8 kmh^-1 vVO_2max  ), but the subjects were professional endurance runners. I can’t get the vLT from the abstract, but I wonder if it was close to 16-17 kmh^-1. I wonder how come these professional endurance runners have almost the same result as mine out of shape soccer players in the off-season?

I mean, WTF? Are my guys super-efficient or there is some sort of error?  I have checked some data from Dan Baker’s articles and the vVO_2max of his rugby players are around 4,4 to 4,8 ms^-1 (or 15,84 to 17,28 kmh^-1). He recommended couple of tests to determine vVO_2max

1.      5-6min running test, where the goals is to cover the greatest distance

2.      1,5k-2k running test

3.      Montreal Track Running test (start at 10 kmh^-1 and increase for 1 kmh^-1 every 2 minutes until exhaustion)

Thus I decided to screw the laboratory testing since the results are so dependent on the testing protocol. Next time I will listen to Dan Baker’s advice and do only field tests. My picks are:

1.      Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1 (to see if they are game ready, since it doesn’t tell you the vVO_2max. Check here for more info)

2.      1500m run to determine vVO_2max

3.      5min run in shuttle arrangement as a another way to determine vVO_2max

If I ever decide to do treadmill run, I will do the protocol similar to Montreal Track Running test where speed increases for 1kmh^-1 every 2 minutes. 

 

Extensive Tempo adaptations

            In my starting years as physical preparation coach in soccer I have put great emphasis on extensive tempo running as a form of conditioning. Recently, I started to utilize Billat 15/15 and 30/30 intervals for maximum power development (improvement in vVO_2max along with some improvements in vLT). At the moment I am wondering what adaptation is pursued with extensive tempo?

            Late Charlie Francis utilized extensive tempo as a form of active recovery for his sprinters and work capacity development (whatever that may be actually). Another claim that is circulating around the internet is that extensive tempo causes capilarization of the fast twitch fibers, and thus better heating and nerve impulse transmission. I am not so sure whether we have empiric proof of this claim. 

            Anyway, extensive tempo consists of running certain distance (100s, 200s even 300s) below 75% of top speed (for that distance) with relaxation and walking between runs for about 40secs. Extensive tempo is usually done on the soccer field, where the length is run and width walked. Thus you run 100m for about 18 sec (5,5ms^-1 or 20kmh^-1) and walk 50m for 40sec. If you run 200s you run them for about 38 sec. The HRs are usually in the zones of 140-160bpm, but that depends on the implementation of 100s, 200s and 300s. I am wondering what type of central~peripheral adaptation is this type of workout causing. Take a look at the picture below for better visualization. 

            If we compare extensive tempo with aerobic power intervals, which are done at speeds around 15 – 18 kmh^-1 with rest 1:1 (Billat utilize 15:15 and 30:30, while original track workouts may consists of 3-5 min runs with equal or slightly shorter active rest) we can see a lot of differences: speed is faster, work-to-rest ratio is around 1:2 and the rest is almost passive (walking). 

            If we compare it to the glycolytic power/capacity intervals, speed in those workouts is maximal; work is around 30-45 seconds long and the rest is around 3-4 times longer for the glycolytic power and for glycolytic capacity it is around 60-90 seconds and about equal rest. 

            Thus the extensive tempo workout falls between aerobic power intervals and glycolytic power intervals. The question remains – what adaptation is seen with tempo workout?

            Some of mine ideas regarding this might include:

1.      Technique work at sub-maximal speed, thus providing a nice transition to speed work, aerobic power intervals, glycolytic intervals and RSA training.

2.      From the peripheral adaptation standpoint, work intervals recruit fast twitch fibers (since the speed is well above vLT) that spent CP and glycogen and build up LA and other “waste” products, yet during the recovery  slow twitch fibers “learn” to utilize (oxidize) those products and bring the homeostasis back to normal (or close to normal). Thus, this might look like an extreme fartlek workout around the vLT (see the New Interval Training) aimed at improving lactate shuttle and lactate removal, myoglobin content, maybe even CP contest (which might help in increasing the alactic threshold, a concept by late Charlie Francis). I am not sure if the total volume is enough to cause huge capilarization of the fast twitch fibers or increase of mitochondria (aerobic enzymes) in the fast twitch fibers, but I might be wrong. There might be improvements in the buffer system as well.

3.      From the central standpoint, the HR doesn’t increase all that much along with VO₂ due intermittent nature of the extensive tempo. Thus, it is questionable how much extensive tempo improves central factors (cardiac output, stroke volume, etc) because the amount of time you spend at VO_2max is zero to none (depends of course how much 200s and 300s you have). One factor that might be improved is the lag time or the ability of the CNS/ANS to mobilize physiological systems for homeostasis maintenance as fast as possible. For this reason, extensive tempo might be interesting for HIIT sports.

4.      Taking peripheral~central factors into account, extensive tempo might be useful for improving recovery capacity between short bursts of power, because it improves lag time of physiological systems, along with improving lactate shuttle mechanism, CP recovery and myoglobin contents without killing the athlete and fatiguing fast twitch fibers like real aerobic power and glycolytic power intervals (need a proof for this, not the gut feeling).

5.      The more 200s and 300s you include, the more tempo starts to become aerobic power interval training (due 1:1 work to rest ratio) or even glycolytic capacity workout. Thus, this might present decent transition to those types of workouts.

It would be nice to do a study where one would compare central~peripheral effects, along with performance effects (vLT, vVO_2max, VO_2max and efficiency) of extensive tempo, threshold runs, aerobic power intervals, glycolytic power/capacity intervals and RSA training. Until then coaches are left with a gut feeling.

I have a gut feeling for the extensive tempo....

Another issue I am struggling with is with all volume factors equal, what will have greatest negative effect on speed/power development: low intensity aerobic runs, lactate threshold runs, aerobic power intervals, extensive tempo or glycolytic training? Or is it actually the total volume of training that is providing negative effect on speed and power (take strength training for example and it’s effect on speed/power)?

            

 My current recommendations, especially for team sports (soccer, rugby) for inclusion of extensive tempo in the endurance component during the preparatory period are the following:

Block A	Block B	Block C
Extensive tempo Sweet spot runs Fartlek around vLT	Aerobic power intervals (short and long) Some extensive aerobic capacity training to maintain adaptation (cross-training)	RSA Glycolytic conditioning Some extensive aerobic capacity training to maintain adaptation (cross-training)

            Please check the Problems of the periodization of training in mixed sports for more info. 

            Since the extensive tempo workout comes from the sprint world (where it serves active recovery purpose and some aerobic workout) it might be difficult to implement it into training of other athletes (square peg + round hole) without deciding what adaptation is seek and how to incorporate it into the whole training system. 

For more info on extensive tempo workouts please check the recent Joel Jamieson article on extensive tempo. 

            If someone is willing to provide more info on the adaptations of the extensive tempo please leave a comment or contact me via email. 

            Please stay tuned for part two…..

Read More