Archive for March, 2012

Your Training and Your Health

If there is one thing I’ve learned in my time training (however short that may be by comparison), it’s that sometimes we can do some very stupid things for various reasons. Usually that reason is pride, but sometimes it’s a misunderstanding of form or a breakdown thereof and pushing through that breakdown due to pride. This chain of events is often followed by realization of an injury. Recent injuries on my list come in the form of muscle strain in my quad from overtraining and plantar fasciitis also from overtraining. Both of these injuries come from pride and not being willing to stop when I should have, and have taught me some valuable lessons.

Coaches

I read the adage that coaches should be much like doctors in making an effort to “do no harm” with our athletes. Your first priority, even above progressing through their lifts, should be maintaining the health of your athletes. It’s been my experience that the more I let my pride get the better of me, the less competing and training I can due to the injuries incurred. Programming and coaching should be done in a way which minimizes injury risk while still making strength and performance gains in your athletes. This is pretty common sense, but I’ve seen it happen where high school gyms here have the most arbitrary training sessions posted on the wall with little to no thought behind the programming or the needs of the individual athlete. Some of it makes sense, while some of it also makes me wonder just how kids are making any progress. It’s part of my argument against CrossFit, with its underqualified coaches and high volume programming, you’re just begging for an overuse injury or an injury coming from poor, uncorrected (or improperly corrected) form. As coaches, we have a responsibility to turn out a functioning, strong product (our athletes), and if they’re all ending up injured at our hands then we’re not doing too great of a job. Some setbacks are avoidable, some uncontrollable, and we have to do our best to minimize them in order to get our jobs done.

Athletes

I hope you didn’t just skip over the coaches section, because the information’s just as important for you. As I’ve been doing my own programming, I’ve had to wear both hats and it’s as much about the athlete’s mindset as the programming. Stopping at the sensation of pain is near critical. Completing an hour run when your feet are in pain at the 30 minute mark is just stupid and pride is not a good reason to induce injury. Training despite actual pain in a muscle or joint is the same; you’re just asking for a layoff and hindering your own progress. A great yoga instructor once told me to “honor my body” by listening to the tension, the aches and the pains, and to perform my practice based on those messages. I’ve slowly been incorporating those messages into my strength work, and after this most recent setback I’ll be taking it even more seriously. Working yourself into a pile of useless flesh will get you nowhere. Listen to your body and adjust your training accordingly for the sake of your health. The less time you spend sidelined, the more time you can spend succeeding on the pitch.

I feel that all of this is fairly common sense, but I clearly haven’t been listening and I know that there are plenty of others out there who are or who have been in my shoes. We don’t have to push through the pain, and the old saying “no pain, no gain” is full of shit. Wanting to be the most “hardcore” may get you some recognition from other guys in the gym, but it stands a good chance of also getting you a shortened career or at least a nice little required rest. Sacrificing your health is a mistake when there is life beyond sport for years, and if you listen to your body you just may get to enjoy that time with minimal pain. Coach smart and train smart, you’ll go far.

2012
03/27
CATEGORY
Coaching Philosophy
Leave a comment

A Second Look: Setting An Example

During the one day which the AAHPERD National Convention was actually up and running last week, I spent the morning in a session held by physical educators and advocates from PHE Canada who were discussing their country’s embedding of physical literacy into all sport and physical education curricula. At a lull in the conversation some questions arose from the audience about the educational systems in Canada, and I had to take the time to ask something which I considered important to know:

About 50-60% of the facilitating teachers which I have been placed with during pre-service teaching have been overweight or obese, would you have any insight to the health and fitness levels of your physical educators in Canada by comparison? Are there any requirements in place for health or fitness levels of physical educators?

Rather than getting an answer from the presenters, I was met with an immediate backlash from other educators in the room. Many pressed that if they know their stuff, then it doesn’t matter how fit the teacher is. Others took my side, arguing that the teachers should be sending a message to live a healthy life not just through the content of the course, but through their own actions.

One woman turned on me, asking “Are you saying that they should fire those teachers who are unfit?”

I explained that it would be unrealistic for me to say that we should fire every overweight or unfit physical educator. My angle is that when it comes time to replace these teachers, principals should be looking to replace them with physical educators who can make the walk across the gym floor without having to stop to catch their breath. With the way the discussion turned after my remark about hiring, it was apparent who supported and who opposed my ideas with near perfect alignment in accordance with the person’s own physical attributes: the fit and healthy supported me and the overweight opposed me.

I’m not saying that we have to be the fittest or the healthiest, but we have to be making an effort to reach our physical best as an example to our students. Demonstrating that we believe in what we teach is critical to impacting our students. If we’re going through what they’re going through and demonstrating that we can do it, then so can they. In this way, even the currently unhealthy and unfit can make an impact by showing that they’re making an attempt to progress towards a better life. The 280 pound teacher who loses weight over the time which he’s teaching a group of students can be an excellent example of “If he can do it, then so can I.”

2012
03/20
CATEGORY
Coaching Philosophy
Leave a comment

Training vs Working Out

I get asked on a weekly basis, “what workout should I do today?” It grinds my gear at times because I don’t know every person’s goals (or if they even have goals) or what they want to get out of this “workout”. When I get messages like this I feel as if people are asking me for a WOD, and if you’ve read my previous work then you know how I feel about that.

Going into the gym every day without a general framework and long-term goals and picking a workout, or just putting lifts together on the fly will wear you out and get you nowhere fast. I often want to answer these messages I receive with something insane:

  • 12×1 Hang clean
  • 3×10 Front squat
  • 3×10 Leg press
  • 3×10 Bench press
  • 2×20 Dumbbell curls
  • 60 min treadmill 160-170 bpm Avg. HR

That would be cruel though, right? All a session like that would do is wear you down and prevent any progress from being made, but that’s a “workout” which I have witnessed in my university’s own gym.

Working out to me means going in and just doing something in order to say that you’re “wrecked from going to the gym”. This is very different from training. Training is based on attempting to achieve both short- and long-term goals through organized and specifically programmed sessions. You know what you’re doing well in advance of going to the gym, from the sets/reps to a general idea of the weights you’ll be using and the rest intervals. Even more important is that with training you should know exactly why you’re doing what you’re doing in the gym, how it affects your body and how it helps you achieve your goals.  Having these things in mind makes it possible for you to potentially see some more consistent progress towards the goals you want to achieve.

The point to come away with from this is: set your goals, be realistic, and research a program that works best to help you achieve these goals. Focus on steady progress, as there’s no quick fix in this field. You won’t go from squatting less than body weight to squatting 500+lbs overnight; it takes time and requires patience and dedication. Stop working out, set goals, and start training.

2012
03/13
CATEGORY
Coaching Philosophy
Leave a comment

Using the Generic Levels of Skill Proficiency in S&C

Like physical educators, strength and conditioning coaches can work with a large number of students/clients/athletes (henceforth, athletes). And much like a physical education class, those athletes can have varied levels of skill between them. In the strength and conditioning realm, these skills would be the lifts you work with, sprinting, sled pushing, and any other movements you have your athletes perform.

We observe the levels of proficiency with which the athletes perform these skills, quantifying them by form, repetition maximums, times, and so on. We could also use what Graham, Holt/Hale, and Parker call generic levels of skill proficiency (GLSP) to qualify these observations, using the quantified data to assess ability at one of four levels:

  • Precontrol
  • Control
  • Utilization
  • Proficiency

These levels each denote qualities about the athlete’s level of proficiency with a specific skill. Breaking assessment down on a skill-by-skill basis means that an athlete can perform various skills at various GLSPs (squat at proficiency level, but dribble and pass for soccer at a control level). I have adapted the following descriptors of GLSPs from Graham, Holt/Hale, & Parker’s work.

Precontrol

Precontrol level is often the level at which someone who is entirely unfamiliar with a skill performs.

  • Athlete is unable to repeat movements in succession; one attempt looks nothing like another attempt to perform the same skill.
  • Athlete uses extraneous movements that are unnecessary for efficient performance of the skill (Heels coming off of the ground in a squat, butt coming off of the bench during a bench press, etc.).
  • Athlete seems awkward and frequently doesn’t even come close to performing the skill correctly (quarter squats, awkwardly bouncing the bar off of the chest in bench press, etc.).
  • In practice, the equipment seems to control the athlete more than the athlete controls the equipment (awkward movement, unsteady stance, or improper positioning of the bar on the back in a squat).

Things to focus on with athletes at the precontrol skill level: practice the basic mechanics behind a movement, body control, practice with body weight variations of the skill/movement.

Control

Control level is the level of someone who has slight familiarity with a skill/movement and can perform it with a minimal level of success.

  • Athlete’s movements appear to be more in line with their intentions (running in a straight line when attempting to sprint, propelling the bar away from the body when bench pressing, etc.).
  • Repetitions of a skill/movement are more consistent in form.
  • Successful performance of the skill/movement is more frequent.
  • Performance of the skill/movement is not automatic and requires concentration to correctly perform.

When coaching at control level, focus on: providing feedback on what portions of the skill/movement are performed correctly to build confidence, making one adjustment at a time to incorrect performance of skills/movements (if multiple issues exist, correct one at a time), and using light weights with lifts to work on proper form.

Utilization

At utilization level, the athlete can often perform the skill/movement automatically in a game situation with some level of success. The athlete can perform the skill/movement in a variety of ways/situations.

  • The skill/movement is more automatic and can be performed successfully, but with concentration.
  • Athlete is beginning to develop use of the skill in unpredictable situations.
  • Athlete can execute the skill/movement consistently with success.
  • Athlete can combine the skill with other skills/movements.

Coaching at the utilization level should include: fine tuning of motor ability involved in skills/movements, getting in more successful repetitions of a skill in multiple contexts to make performance more automatic.

Proficiency

The highest level in the GLSPs, proficiency level is characterized by seemingly effortless/automatic movements. My best example of a demonstration of proficiency level is any professional athlete at the international level, those men/women who make what they do on the pitch look easy enough that any child who picked up a ball/stick/etc. could do it. Brian O’Driscoll cutting through a defense, LeBron James moving to the hoop, or any other athlete at the absolute top of their game.

  • Skill/movement performance has become almost automatic, and performance of the skill in similar contexts yields almost identical results.
  • Athlete can focus on outside variable (opponents, the flow of play, field position, the movement of an unpredictable object, etc.) and still perform the skill/movement as intended.
  • The skill/movement seems effortless as it appears to be performed with ease or with little attention given to it.
  • Athlete can modify and perform the skill/movement in a wide variety of familiar and unfamiliar contexts with high levels of success.

Recommendations for coaching athletes at the proficiency level: promote creative use of skill during practice (unless skill is lifting related), fine tune aspects of the skill to increase efficiency, and practice the skill in a large variety of situations (once again, not for lifting related skills).

Assessing and categorizing an athlete’s skill level into one of the GLSPs should be done through observation of skill performance on numerous occasions (we all have off days). Multiple observations can allow for a more detailed assessment and accurate placement on the continuum. Observation of practice and event/match situations also allows for a greater understanding of GLSP as an athlete may appear to be at a higher level at practice than in match situations where contexts may be unfamiliar.

These levels were originally used to qualify elementary school children, but I believe they can be applied to any age group. There are beginners and people new to a sport or event at all ages, and so we should be able to apply the GLSPs to their development and assessment. It’s a quick and easy way to describe skill levels with a large number of skills. As coaches we can use these to get a general idea of how to move forward with individual skill progressions for athletes at all levels and ages.

References:

Graham, G., Holt/Hale, S. A., & Parker, M. (2007). Determining generic levels of skill proficiency. In Children Moving: A reflective approach to teaching physical education (7th ed., chap. 7). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

2012
03/06
CATEGORY
Coaching Philosophy
Leave a comment
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 689 other followers