• Home
    • About
    • Alumni
    • Internships
  • Train With BBA
    • Elite Performance
    • Middle School Performance
    • Youth FUNdamentals
    • Adult Ninja's
    • Team Training
  • Athlete Central
    • BBA Athlete Manual
    • Nutrition
    • Recovery
  • Shop
    • Rack Flywheel
    • Flywheel Manual
    • Game Book
  • Podcast
    • Episodes
  • Blog
  • Home
    • About
    • Alumni
    • Internships
  • Train With BBA
    • Elite Performance
    • Middle School Performance
    • Youth FUNdamentals
    • Adult Ninja's
    • Team Training
  • Athlete Central
    • BBA Athlete Manual
    • Nutrition
    • Recovery
  • Shop
    • Rack Flywheel
    • Flywheel Manual
    • Game Book
  • Podcast
    • Episodes
  • Blog
Building Better Athletes

Blog

Can You Get Faster?

2/29/2016

0 Comments

 
Now to a question I get all the time. 

Can I Get Faster???

The short answer is a big YES!

Anybody can most definitely get faster.

The long answer is - Everyone's genetic profile will limit the ceiling they can reach, but I have yet to find an athlete who has reached that ceiling.   It's not always easy and there are a ton of factors that go into enhancing speed, but every athlete I've met has the potential to improve on their linear speed.

Here are the 3 major ways we can increase speed...


1) Mechanics 

Mechanics and technique most definitely matter, and anybody who says differently is dead wrong.  As research on sprint mechanics continues to poor in, it's becoming evidently clear that mechanics play a huge role in developing speed.

The orientation of force application into the ground is more important to performance than the total amount (1)

Many Strength and Conditioning professionals tend to think that it's just all about strength, and while strength matters (look number 2), it's only a small part of the equation.  Athletes can't just improve their squat or clean and magically get faster, or at least reach their speed potential. 

Adequate technical proficiency needs to exhibited in order to sprint fast, and this means adequate times needs to be put into coaching and teaching it. 

But whenever we get into full go sprints, all of the the mechanic work goes out the window!

I hear this a lot, and I feel it's a cop out.

Coaches work their butts of to perfect squat mechanics or Olympic lift mechanics, but when you throw a max load on an athlete, often times this technique goes to hell.

So why is lifting work viewed differently than speed work?

The truth is, yes some of this mechanical work might be lost when shit hits the fan, but that doesn't mean you don't do it.

Trust me, things will stick, and if you stay after it and emphasize sprinting mechanics as much as you emphasize lifting mechanics, your athletes will get better.

Improving acceleration and sprint mechanics can be as small as altering foot strike by a few inches, body posture by a few degrees, leg path by a few inches, etc.

It's often times small changes that make huge differences, but they don't come easy, just as learning the power clean doesn't come easy.

It's takes time and understanding motor learning, and being able to convey context and intent to the athlete.


2) Strength 

Strength is a touchy matter, but the truth remains - strength matters!  I just don't think it matters as much as most S&C coaches think.

Depending on the level of experience, age of the participants, and the length of the study, there have been mixed results. For example, it has been shown that it takes exceptionally large increases in 1RM back squat strength (~23-27%) to only slightly increase sprinting speed (2-3%) (5,6).

A longitudinal study followed NCAA I football players at Oklahoma State University over the course of 4-years, and the researchers concluded that while athletes gained much strength in the back squat, they did not improve their sprinting speed, showing a possible disconnect between the back squat and improving sprinting speed (6)

Also consider this...
  • Ground contact times for acceleration are typically ~.20sec
  • Ground contact times for max velocity are typically ~.08-.10sec
  • Max force production takes ~.70sec (7) 

So during speed actions, athletes are only on the ground for ~1/3 - 1/7 of the time that it actually takes to express max force production.  This demonstrates the disconnect between max strength and speed, and instead demonstrates the ability and rate to apply large forces in shorter and shorter times. 


Having more strength will give you a higher ceiling, but ultimately it comes down to being able to express high forces, very quickly - so yes strength does matter, but ultimately it's only a small piece of the puzzle. 

In support, a recent meta-analysis by Setiz (2014) looked at 15 studies, consisting of 510 subjects showed strength in the back squat significantly correlated to sprinting speed. They concluded that lower-body strength transfers positively to sprint performance and should be noted as a relevant training regimen to coaches and athletes (4)

This meta-analysis shows the importance of strength, but here's the thing, many of these studies use novice or untrained athletes.  In this case and it definitely applies to the development of athletes - strength definitely influences speed, but much of this impact is on younger, novice type of athletes.  As athletes become more experienced and more developed, strength becomes less important.


Do you think Usain Bolt would get faster is he focused on improving his squat by 30lbs?

Heck no!

So when I hear S&C coaches say strength is the number 1 factor to increase speed, they are just plain wrong.  This might work for young or inexperienced athletes, but tons of other factors come into play. 


3) Elasticity + Stiffness

We are combining elasticity and stiffness because they are closely related and often we are talking about the same structures.

Elasticity is extremely important for acceleration and sprinting speed.  As we touched upon earlier, ground contact times are much shorter than the amount of time it takes to express max force.  Given this, elastic abilities become ultra important to transmit "free" forces from muscle and connective tissues.  Stiffness is tremendously important to resist deformation and provide a stiff structure for the elastic properties of muscles and connectives tissues to be fully expressed.

Tendon stiffness and training the SSC has been shown to be related to higher vertical jump and sprinting speed (8-12).  The difficult thing is adaptations in connective tissues appear to take take 6 months to 2 years, compared to 3 weeks for muscle.  But things like low-end plyo's, bouncing, eccentric, and isometric training are all effective for developing greater elasticity and stiffness. 

We are looking to enhance stiffness throughout the body, but especially in the lower leg - To act like a pogo stick, with slight deformation but great elastic return.  We tell our athletes all the time - having strong and stiff foot/lower leg complex is like having brand new, pumped up tires.  Having weak feet/lower leg complex is like trying to drive on flat tires - You are very inefficient and lose all the force transmission from the hips.

Fast athletes appear to bounce and float off ground.  They are quick and snap off the ground.  It's amazing to hear a fast athletes feet as they accelerate and sprint.  It's quick and quiet and snappy. 

The great sprint coach Charlie Francis was known to say, he knew when his athletes were fatigued by the sound of their foot strike.  When it became loud and poundy, he know it was time to quit the sessions. 

Why?

His athletes were losing their elasticity and stiffness, and the session could only be detrimental from there on out. 

This is elasticity and stiffness at it's core


Stay tuned for Part 3 - Phases of Sprinting.


Go Get 'Em



Resources:

1) Morin, J. B., Edouard, P., & Samozino, P. (2011). Technical ability of force application as a determinant factor of sprint performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(9), 1680-8.

2)  Bojsen-Møller, J., Magnusson, S. P., Rasmussen, L. R., Kjaer, M., & Aagaard, P. (2005). Muscle performance during maximal isometric and dynamic contractions is influenced by the stiffness of the tendinous structures. Journal of Applied Physiology, 99(3), 986-994.

3)  Liu, Y., Peng, C. H., Wei, S. H., Chi, J. C., Tsai, F. R., & Chen, J. Y. (2006). Active leg stiffness and energy stored in the muscles during maximal counter movement jump in the aged. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 16(4), 342-351.


4)  Seitz, L. B., Reyes, A., Tran, T. T., de Villarreal, E. S., & Haff, G. G. (2014). Increases in Lower-Body Strength Transfer Positively to Sprint Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(12), 1693-1702.

5) Cronin, J., Ogden, T., Lawton, T., & Brughelli, M. (2007). Does Increasing Maximal Strength Improve Sprint Running Performance?. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 29(3), 86-95.

6)  Jacobson, B. H., Conchola, E. G., Glass, R. G., & Thompson, B. J. (2013). Longitudinal morphological and performance profiles for American, NCAA Division I football players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 27(9), 2347-2354.

7)  Baechle, T. R., & Earle, R. W. (2008). Essentials of strength training and conditioning. Human kinetics.

8)  Viitasalo, J. T., Salo, A., & Lahtinen, J. (1998). Neuromuscular functioning of athletes and non-athletes in the drop jump. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 78(5), 432-440.

9)  Wilson, J. M., & Flanagan, E. P. (2008). The role of elastic energy in activities with high force and power requirements: a brief review. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 22(5), 1705-1715.

10)  Chelly, S. M., & Denis, C. (2001). Leg power and hopping stiffness: relationship with sprint running performance. Medicine and Science in sports and Exercise, 33(2), 326-333.

11)  HENNESSY, L., & KILTY, J. (2001). Relationship of the stretch-shortening cycle to sprint performance in trained female athletes. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 15(3), 326-331.
​

12) Harrison, A. J., Keane, S. P., & Coglan, J. (2004). Force-velocity relationship and stretch-shortening cycle function in sprint and endurance athletes. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 18(3), 473-479.
0 Comments

Forces For Speed

2/25/2016

3 Comments

 
Within the sprinting community, there is much debate about the most important forces that are necessary for faster sprinting speeds.

Is it horizontal or vertical?

Is one more important during certain phases of acceleration vs top-end speed?

Why the confusion?

Let's take a look into both Horizontal and Vertical forces and clear the air about both of them.


Horizontal

Recent research has shown high levels of horizontal force application is related to faster sprinting speeds, especially acceleration speed.  Horizontal forces can be seen in two lights
  • Those that propel us
  • Those that brake us
The latter being often forgotten.  Obviously positive horizontal forces will act to propel us forward, but each ground contract is met with friction and placement of the foot compared to the COM - these inherently cause horizontal braking forces. 

With that being said, there has been a barrage of recent research showing the contributions of horizontal forces and impulses as being major players in sprinting speed. 

In fact, it would be safe to summarize that it appears horizontal forces are of greater importance to sprinting speed than vertical forces - but there may be some caveats.    


Vertical 

There are a few constants in our life - taxes, death, and GRAVITY to name a few.

Gravity is the force that we cannot avoid discussing as it will always be there and will always play a huge role in sprinting speed.  Like it or not, gravity acts on all of us as we sprint.

  • As we push and drive off the ground, we fight gravity.
  • As our center of mass falls back to the ground after the flight phase, we must fight gravity.
  • At ground contact, we must be resilient and resist crumpling, must of which has to do with gravity.  

The fact that no one on earth can hide from gravity, makes it pretty clear that during the sprinting cycle, we must fight the forces of gravity and these forces are inherently vertical.

The popularity of vertical forces can be traced back to the most famous study in sprinting history - Peter Weyand's sprinting study done in year 2000 at his famous SMU sprinting laboratory.  Weyand et al (2000) looked at correlations between vertical forces and sprinting speed of 33 subjects.  Vertical forces were found to be significantly greater in faster runners than slower ones (7).

Since, this study has been the backbone for the vertical force side, but we must also realize the correlation coefficient between vertical force and running speed was only (r = 0.39), which is considered low by most standards.  Also the researchers did NOT test for horizontal forces - so there were no comparative measures. 

Still, it is undeniable that vertical forces play a role in sprinting performance.  


Acceleration Speed vs Top-End Speed

It appears that both horizontal and vertical forces play a role in sprinting speed, but do different phases of sprinting - acceleration vs top-end - have different levels of horizontal vs vertical importance?

Acceleration

Let's breakdown a few studies and see what the literature says...

Buchheit et al (5) analyzed the horizontal forces of 86 elite youth soccer players during sprinting. The researchers found that horizontal force was significantly correlated with acceleration speed (10m) but not maximum sprinting speed, suggesting horizontal forces may be more important for acceleration performance than maximal sprinting performance.  

Morin et al (4) looked at different phases of a 40m sprint. The researchers found that net horizontal impulse and propulsive horizontal impulse were strongly correlated to sprinting performance in the 40m sprint, but vertical impulses was not (4).  Now the 40m dash is a combination of both acceleration and top-end speed, but most would argue acceleration performance is probably more important than top-end speed.

Almost 30-years ago Mero (1988) analyzed the sprints of elite Finnish sprinters over 10m from a block start.  Mero found a couple of important nuggets.  First, at the first foot contact, even though the foot landed behind the COM by over 10cm, there were still horizontal braking forces to overcome.  So even a positive angle at foot contact BEHIND the COM still equaled horizontal braking forces, demonstration that no matter what there will be horizontal forces to be overcome. 

Friction = needing to overcome horizontal forces = slowing down.  

Second, Mero found correlation between horizontal forces in the first step and at 10m and sprinting speed.  These same correlations, however, were not found in regards to vertical forces (3).   

De Lacey et al. (2014) looked at 39 rugby players from the National Rugby League.  They looked at the 10m and 40m dashes on a non-motorized treadmill and compared the differences between backs and forwards.  They found faster players produced significantly greater relative horizontal force and power.  The researchers concluded that developing force and power in the horizontal direction may be beneficial for improving sprint performance in professional rugby league players (6). 


Top-End

Morin et al (2) analyzed 13 male subjects with different sprint performance levels ranging from novice to world class ability.  The researchers found that peak sprinting velocity was related to both vertical and horizontal forces, but the correlation for horizontal was stronger (r=0.59 vs r=0.79).

We already reviewed Weyand et al. (2000) and this remains the vocal research paper for the vertical forces group.

Brughelli et al (1) looked at 16 high level Australian soccer players as they sprinted over a Woodway force treadmill at speed ranging from 40-100% max sprinting speed.  The researchers found that as speed increased from 40 to 60%, peak vertical and peak horizontal forces increased by 14.3% and 34.4% respectively.  But as the subjects increased speed from 60-80% speed, changes in peak vertical and peak horizontal forces were 1.0% and 21.0% respectively.   Finally, as the subjects increased speed from 80-100% speed, changes in peak vertical and peak horizontal forces were 2.0% and 24.3%.  Overall, the researcher concluded it would seem that increasing maximal sprint velocity may be more dependent on horizontal force production as opposed to vertical force production (1)

Kale et al. (2009) looked at 21 male sprinters and ran these subjects through a gamet of tests.  They found that ability to produce vertical force, in the form of a depth jump, was the most strongly correlated test to 100m dash sprinting speed.  In conclusion, vertical power and force in the form of a depth jump was an effective way to reflect maximum running velocity.  The thought process of the researchers is that this same vertical force in the depth jump, is very applicable to the manner of force application during max velocity.  But as we know, correlation does not equal causation (8). 


Overall Thoughts

Running fast cannot be zoned into just a single force or factor, speed is multi-dimensional with many different aspects being intertwined.  If anyone says it's just a single force or single factor... run, run away fast!

The other factor that seems obvious to me, is the action of the body is very similar in both stages - acceleration and top-end speed - and the difference seen in forces is just a outcome of body positioning. 

As Mike Young has said - "Acceleration is just top speed turned on it's side".

The actions of the body are the similar/same, it's just body orientation in relation to the ground that differs and this is where changes in forces is seen. 

Take a look a Usain Bolt accelerating in the picture below.
Picture
Now tilt that picture to the right, and you get what look like pretty solid top-end mechanics.
Picture
Now we could critique some minor differences between this tilted picture and perfect top-end mechanics, but in my opinion, the differences you see in forces are largely due to the orientation of the body and the natural outcome from these positions rather than anything largely different in terms of intent or muscle actions. 

Now what's interesting is in Weyand's first study back in 2000, most S&C coaches interpreted the results from that study - more vertical force = more speed - as a need to increase an athletes squat and deadlift strength and that will increase speed. 

Well, we know it doesn't really work that way.  We know GCT is under .20 for acceleration and .10 for top-end speed, not even close to enough time to put maximal muscle force into the ground. 

Also, I haven't seen a study done, but I would be really interested in seeing if gains in strength in the back squat or deadlift actually increase vertical and/or horizontal ground forces. 

I really don't think if adding pounds onto an athletes squat or deadlift will actually carryover to greater ground forces.  It would be interesting to see a correlation done on these weight room strength numbers and ground forces (both vertical and horizontal).  I think in novices there may be a slight relationship, but I highly doubt at higher ability levels you'd see any relationship.  

This isn't to say lifting isn't important, I feel it improves qualities in other realms that transfer to ground forces.  Things like stiffness, resisting deformation, body composition, motor unit recruitment, rate coding, and muscular coordination/timing.  These will all help speed in different ways, but I truly believe it's not as simple as more force in the weight room = more force applied during sprinting, otherwise the strongest people would also be the fastest. 

That's all for now.  Stay tuned for our next installment on muscle actions/activities. 


Go Get 'Em!


References

1)  Brughelli, M., Cronin, J., & Chaouachi, A. (2011). Effects of running velocity on running kinetics and kinematics. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 25(4), 933-939.

2) Morin, J. B., Bourdin, M., Edouard, P., Peyrot, N., Samozino, P., & Lacour, J. R. (2012). Mechanical determinants of 100-m sprint running performance. European journal of applied physiology, 112(11), 3921-3930.

3) Mero, A. (1988). Force-time characteristics and running velocity of male sprinters during the acceleration phase of sprinting. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 59(2), 94-98.

4) Morin, J. B., Slawinski, J., Dorel, S., Couturier, A., Samozino, P., Brughelli, M., & Rabita, G. (2015). Acceleration capability in elite sprinters and ground impulse: Push more, brake less?. Journal of biomechanics.

5) Buchheit, M., Samozino, P., Glynn, J. A., Michael, B. S., Al Haddad, H., Mendez-Villanueva, A., & Morin, J. B. (2014). Mechanical determinants of acceleration and maximal sprinting speed in highly trained young soccer players. Journal of sports sciences, 32(20), 1906-1913.

6) De Lacey, J., Brughelli, M. E., McGuigan, M. R., & Hansen, K. T. (2014). Strength, Speed and Power Characteristics of Elite Rugby League Players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 28(8), 2372-2375.

7) Weyand, P. G., Sternlight, D. B., Bellizzi, M. J., & Wright, S. (2000). Faster top running speeds are achieved with greater ground forces not more rapid leg movements. Journal of applied physiology, 89(5), 1991-1999.

8)  Kale, M., Asçi, A., Bayrak, C., & Açikada, C. (2009). Relationships among jumping performances and sprint parameters during maximum speed phase in sprinters. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 23(8), 22
3 Comments

BBA Journal of Sports Performance -  PEAK POWER OUTPUT BETWEEN HEX BAR JUMP SQUAT  VS HANG SNATCH WITH SAME LOADS

2/21/2016

0 Comments

 
For anyone that has done research or submitted to a journal, knows the amount of time, detail, revisions, and head-ache that goes into writing and researching for a paper.

Writing a proposal, getting proposal approval, getting IRB approval, collecting subjects, data collection, data analysis, submission to journals, rejection, another submission, revisions, re-submission, more revisions, re-submission, and finally acceptance.  This process can take anywhere fem 6-18months from start to finish; not to mention the tons of stress and time and loss of confidence that comes from writing, sifting through hundreds of research articles, inevitable rejection, double digit revisions, and wondering if your work will ever be accepted. 

For those of us who are full-time coaches, it is difficult to find the time and energy to dedicate to this type of consistent research.

With that being said, I do think every S&C coach should strive to produce a real scientific paper and be published by a journal.

There are a couple of reasons for this.
  1. We have access to real, high level athletes -  something a lot of research is missing
  2. Give back and further the education of our field
  3. Appreciate and understand of how difficult, tedious, and in-depth research can be.  It's a pet peeve of mine when coaches, who have never published research, criticize those that do.  You'll be humbled when you go through this process

While I do enjoy the process and the opportunity to have work published, I also know there is simply not enough hours in the day to get all the data I track published into a journal.

So instead, I will label articles in this section as BBA Journal of Sports Performance.  This will be where I can dump research that we're conducting at BBA, but aren't working to get published into a journal.

With that being said, this work will all be conducted in a scientific manner - clear procedures, proper set-up, detailed data collection, and data analysis.  There will be less detailed introductions and discussions - just want to present the data with a few closing thoughts.

The overall goal is for this data to be more than anecdotal or what another pet peeve of mine is when coaches say, "We've seen great results from INSERT EXERCISE/TOOL/MODALITY".  Yet, they cannot produce results, a control group, or inferential statistics to validate their claims.

So without further ado, let's go into this BBA Journal Study.
PEAK POWER OUTPUT BETWEEN HEX BAR JUMP SQUAT 
VS HANG SNATCH 
WITH SAME LOADS
INTRODUCTION:

In many strength and conditioning environments, the implementation of the Olympic lifts is very common.  The Olympic lifts are suggested as a training modality to enhance power production and athletic performance (1,2).  This notion has been commonly accepted and adopted by many S&C professionals, despite previous literature failing to provide unequivocal evidence to support this claim. The Olympic lifts fail to elicit the power production of a vertical jump (4), and sub-maximal deadlifts have been shown to produce similar power production (3) as the Olympic lift variations.  Not only that, previous literature suggests that Olympic lift derivatives (pull, shrug variations) may provide a training stimulus that is as good, if not better than the full Olympic lift variation (5).  Previous comparisons of the hang clean vs jump shrug, and high pull found that the jump shrug produced greater peak power output, peak GRF, and peak velocity than either the hang clean or the high pull.  Also, the high pull produced greater peak power output and peak velocity than the hang clean (5,6).

This study aims to compare peak power outputs during the hang snatch and hex bar jump squat.

SUBJECTS: 

Seven trained male subjects (n=7; age=24; years of Olympic lifting experience = 5.86).  Each subject was a former collegiate athlete, who went through a college S&C program which included Olympic lift variations. 

PROCEDURES:

Participants went through their own individual warm-up before getting set-up for a hang snatch and hex bar jump squat training session.  Using a tendo unit, subjects started at an estimated 20% RM, and performed sets of 2 at full effort and intent to move the bar as fast as possible.  The subjects would perform a set of 2 on the hang snatch, wait 2-minutes and then perform a set of 2 on the hex bar jump squat with the same load.  They would then rest another 2-minutes before performing repeating this process with an additional 5-15% load.  This process continued until the participant reached a RM set of 2 in the hang snatch.  Every repetition was recorded with a tendo unit, and peak power output information was collected with every rep.  

RESULTS: 

Each participant recorded between 14-20 data points (depending on how many sets they performed until reaching their RM set of 2) for each the hex bar jump squat and hang snatch, for a total of 122 data points for each experimental group.  


Using a paired T-Test (p< 0.05), no significant difference (p=0.68) was found between the hex bar jump squat and hang snatch (3276.20 watts vs 3206.60 watts).  Peak power output, in matched loads, was similar between in the hex bar jump squat than the hang snatch. 

DISCUSSION:

The hang snatch and hex bar squat jump elicited similar peak power outputs in experienced subjects.  Based on our previous research (found HERE
), the hex bar jump squat (HB) and hang snatch (HS) produce higher power outputs than the hang clean (HC) (HB =3263.49 watts ; HS =3276.20 watts ; HC = 3042.66 watts)
0 Comments

BBA Journal of Sports Performance - PEAK POWER OUTPUT BETWEEN HEX BAR JUMP SQUAT VS  HANG CLEAN AND HANG SNATCH WITH SAME LOADS

2/15/2016

0 Comments

 

For anyone that has done research or submitted to a journal, knows the amount of time, detail, revisions, and head-ache that goes into writing and researching for a paper.

Writing a proposal, getting proposal approval, getting IRB approval, collecting subjects, data collection, data analysis, submission to journals, rejection, another submission, revisions, re-submission, more revisions, re-submission, and finally acceptance.  This process can take anywhere fem 6-18months from start to finish; not to mention the tons of stress and time and loss of confidence that comes from writing, sifting through hundreds of research articles, inevitable rejection, double digit revisions, and wondering if your work will ever be accepted.

For those of us who are full-time coaches, it is difficult to find the time and energy to dedicate to this type of consistent research.

With that being said, I do think every S&C coach should strive to produce a real scientific paper and be published by a journal.

There are a couple of reasons for this.
  1. We have access to real, high level athletes -  something a lot of research is missing
  2. Give back and further the education of our field
  3. Appreciate and understand of how difficult, tedious, and in-depth research can be.  It's a pet peeve of mine when coaches, who have never published research, criticize those that do.  You'll be humbled when you go through this process

While I do enjoy the process and the opportunity to have work published, I also know there is simply not enough hours in the day to get all the data I track published into a journal.

So instead, I will label articles in this section as BBA Journal of Sports Performance.  This will be where I can dump research that we're conducting at BBA, but aren't working to get published into a journal.

With that being said, this work will all be conducted in a scientific manner - clear procedures, proper set-up, detailed data collection, and data analysis.  There will be less detailed introductions and discussions - just want to present the data with a few closing thoughts.

The overall goal is for this data to be more than anecdotal or what another pet peeve of mine is when coaches say, "We've seen great results from INSERT EXERCISE/TOOL/MODALITY".  Yet, they cannot produce results, a control group, or inferential statistics to validate their claims.

So without further ado, let's go into this BBA Journal Study.
​

PEAK POWER OUTPUT BETWEEN HEX BAR JUMP SQUAT 
VS HANG CLEAN WITH SAME LOADS
INTRODUCTION:

In many strength and conditioning environments, the implementation of the Olympic lifts is very common.  The Olympic lifts are suggested as a training modality to enhance power production and athletic performance (1,2).  This notion has been commonly accepted and adopted by many S&C professionals, despite previous literature failing to provide unequivocal evidence to support this claim. The Olympic lifts fail to elicit the power production of a vertical jump (4), and sub-maximal deadlifts have been shown to produce similar power production (3) as the Olympic lift variations.  Not only that, previous literature suggests that Olympic lift derivatives (pull, shrug variations) may provide a training stimulus that is as good, if not better than the full Olympic lift variation (5).  Previous comparisons of the hang clean vs jump shrug, and high pull found that the jump shrug produced greater peak power output, peak GRF, and peak velocity than either the hang clean or the high pull.  Also, the high pull produced greater peak power output and peak velocity than the hang clean (5,6).

This study aims to compare peak power outputs during the hang clean and hex bar jump squat.

SUBJECTS: 

Seven trained male subjects (n=7; age=24; years of Olympic lifting experience = 5.86).  Each subject was a former collegiate athlete, who went through a college S&C program which included Olympic lift variations. 

PROCEDURES:

Participants went through their own individual warm-up before getting set-up for a hang clean and hex bar jump squat training session.  Using a tendo unit, subjects started at an estimated 20% RM, and performed sets of 2 at full effort and intent to move the bar as fast as possible.  The subjects would perform a set of 2 on the hang clean, wait 2-minutes and then perform a set of 2 on the hex bar jump squat with the same load.  They would then rest another 2-minutes before performing repeating this process with an additional 5-15% load.  This process continued until the participant reached a RM set of 2 in the hang clean.  Every repetition was recorded with a tendo unit, and peak power output information was collected with every rep.  

RESULTS: 

Each participant recorded between 16-20 data points (depending on how many sets they performed until reaching their RM set of 2) for each the hex bar jump squat and hang clean, for a total of 130 data points for each experimental group.  


Using a paired T-Test (p< 0.05), significant difference (p=0.02) was found between the hex bar jump squat and hang clean (3263.49 watts vs 3042.66 watts) in favor of the hex bar jump squat.  Peak power output, in matched loads, was greater in the hex bar jump squat than the hang clean. 

DISCUSSION:


Coaches may want to consider further evaluating the effects of long-term Olympic lifting programming vs alternative means of power production.  These results show that the hex bar jump squat produced higher amounts of peak power output in trained subjects and may be a better alternative to the hang clean. 
0 Comments

Random Speed Thoughts

2/12/2016

0 Comments

 
Enjoy these random thoughts on speed!

  • Speed is about producing force in the right direction and applying that force in the shortest amount of time - This means neuromuscular efficiency, technical/mechanical mastery, stiffness, usage of elastic components, relaxation, rhythm, timing, coordination are all important 
  • Research has shown that triple extension is neither optimal nor necessary in many of the steps during acceleration or top-end speed - what again is the fascination with triple extension? 
  • The main goal in top-end sprinting is front side mechanics. A common error is what path the foot travels at toe-off. Does it keep traveling backwards & upwards or does it travels forward & upward? Upwards and forward is optimal - backwards and upward is wasted motion and time. Pause the video at 5-seconds and see the difference of foot location.​
  • An easy way to look for efficient front side mechanics is to look where the knees are at ground contact. During optimal and efficient mechanics, the knees will line-up at foot contact. During poor mechanics and backside dominant mechanics, the flight leg knee will lag behind. Pause the above video at 6-seconds and look at the differences in knee location and it's clear to see wasted time and what will be a lack of front side mechanics by the athlete on the right, which will in turn equate to less force production. 
  • A favorite drill of mine to improve front side mechanics and "naturally" develop better positioning at foot contact is wickets
  • Errors made during acceleration lead to errors in top-end speed. Quality acceleration = quality top-end 
  • Relaxation is key for top-end speed. As Yuri Verkhoshansky stated, "Relaxation is very important for high velocity movements". Being able to quickly contract and relax is vitally important for maximum efficiency - and not being able to relax will lead to early fatigue, loss of mechanics, and tightening up - all equal a loss of speed and recovery. An easy place to look as at the face or shoulders - are they tense and stiff? If so, the athlete needs to work on relaxation. - Also read THIS
  • A key area I see missing in athletes in ankle stiffness. More ankle stiffness = better stored elastic energy, lower GCT, and more effective force transfer into the ground. This is achieved by better foot/ankle positioning during ground prep and ground contact - mainly dorsiflexion. Also, I'm a big fan of longer duration, low intensity hopping/jumping exercises - This teaches proper ground contact positioning and builds the base of ankle/foot stiffness needed for high speed running. 
  • Speed drills don't directly make one faster - what they do is create context and give the athlete a better understanding and feel of body positioning, trunk and shin angles, tempo, rhythm, posture, and coordination needed to accelerate and reach top-end properly. Drills take time for transfer, but over time, the qualities gained and developed through the context of drills WILL transfer towards better, more efficient mechanics. 
  • Getting faster will increase numbers in the weight room, but increasing numbers in the weight room will not necessarily improve sprinting speed 
  • The foot contacts behind the COM during the first 1-4 step during acceleration = body positioning, shin angle. I keep hearing a big name coach say this doesn't happen and it drives me nuts - Read this MONSTER
  • Continuing on the dorsiflexion path - can't emphasize enough the importance of getting proper dorsiflexion and gaining dorsiflexion ROM. Faster sprinter's not only exhibit dorsiflexion during ground prep and contact, but they initiate the dorsiflexion signal earlier at toe-off. Ingraining dorsiflexion in as many movements as possible innately teaches the athlete the crossed extensor reflex - which leads to shorter GCT and quicker flexion after toe-off. 
  • Arms are neither a maker or breaker of high running speeds. They do contribute to certain aspects of speed enhancement, but they DO NOT lead the legs and are not going to be the major difference in speed enhancement. 
  • The majority of team sports should focus much of their attention on acceleration speed. They should also do so from various start positions, various stimulus to react to, various movements to proceed the acceleration, etc. 
  • Probably the quickest way to instantly improve speed is to improve body composition/lose weight. As Charlie Francis said, "Fat don't Fly!" 
  • Technique matters:
Picture
  • What we say as a coach can effect speed performance. External cues have been shown to be effective at enhancing speed performance 
    • Acceleration = PUSH, Drive the ground behind you, Explode like being shot out of a cannon, Drive your knee forward like your breaking a glass window 
    • Top-End = Stay tall, Bounce, Snap off the ground, Act like your running on hot coals, Imagine your running in knee high grass, Imagine a Lion is chasing you 
  • The Crossed Extensor Reflex is a very interesting concept, and one that I believe plays a big role.  The hard part is trying to train or develop this reflex into our athletes. My thought is repetitions and repetitions of dorsiflexion to ingrain it subconsciously. 
That's all for now. 

Go Get 'Em!
0 Comments

Wisconsin Track and Field Coaches Clinic

2/6/2016

0 Comments

 
I had the pleasure of speaking at the Wisconsin Track and Field Coaches Clinic this past weekend in Madison.  I had two sessions
  • Considerations for Cold Weather Training
  • Building Speed in the Weight Room

It was a great experience and track coaches are always an awesome audience to speak to.  I also had the privilege to work and talk shop with legendary speed coach, Loren Seagrave.  All in all a great weekend, and look forward to going back. 

If you want my presentation on Considerations for Cold Weather Training, email me at buildingbetterathletes.bba@gmail.com

Here is the Building Speed in the Weight Room 

0 Comments

    Michael Zweifel CSCS-

    Owner and Head of Sports Performance. National Player of the Year in Division 3 football. Works with athletes including NFL, NHL, and Olympic athletes.

    Archives

    January 2020
    September 2019
    August 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    August 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    May 2015

    Categories

    All
    Agility
    Business
    Coaching
    In House Research
    Random Thoughts
    Reviews
    Speed
    Training

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly