Author: Vernon Gambetta
Periodization – Some Thoughts Random and Otherwise
There is so much mumbo and confusion in this whole area I am not sure where to begin. Perhaps these thoughts will lend some clarity. Lets start by defining Periodization, it is the planning and organization of training into a cyclic structure to develop all biomotor qualities in a systematic, sequential, and progressive manner for optimum development of performance capabilities. Another way to look at it, it is the timing, sequence and interaction of the training stimulus to allow optimum adaptive response in pursuit of specific competitive goals. It is not about time, it is about timing. It definitely is not random, it is always undulatory in nature based on how the body adapts. You can write a linear program, but the body adapts in an undulatory manner. Despite all that is written about the difference between undulatory and linear periodization, in my opinion those are term of convenience, that confuse rather enlighten. All components must be trained during all phases, only the proportion changes with the training age & stage of training. There is synergy between all systems of the body and a synergistic relationship between all biomotor qualities. According to Olbrecht, different qualities have different curves of supercomensation (Olbrecht p.5). Because the various qualities have different times to adaptation and fitness decline much slower than fatigue it is possible to achieve continual adaptation. I use this rule of thumb regarding adaptation time – Tasks that require complete recovery – Usually are high NEURAL demand. Tasks that can be trained with incomplete recovery – Usually are of high METABOLIC demand. Wave Principle – Continuous alternation of increased and reduced training loads throughout the various training cycles to insure continual adaptation. Steering Principle – Adjustments in training & competition based on the difference between the planned training & competition results and the actual achieved training & competition results. According to Olbrect ”Every loop provides feedback, which is used to plan the next cycle in order to fit in the training process with the individual trainability and so improve the training efficiency and return.”
I, Me, Me
Coaching is not I, me, me, rather it is us, we and them. Great coaches are not the center of attention, they are facilitators, the conductors of the orchestra. They make sure all the pieces are in place. That everyone is on the bus in the the correct seats and that the bus driver has has a good road map to the destination. Remember a good system is athlete centered, coach driven and administratively supported, it is not coach centered. I know this is news to some of the huge egos that have prowled the sidelines over the years, but people did not come come to see them, they came to watch the athletes perform. Great coaches are there in victory and defeat to lend perspective after the wins and comfort after the loses. Great coaches are leaders, not followers. Great coaches are teachers, they look for every opportunity to teach and to learn. They are always working to improve they skills, not just technical skills, but interpersonal skills. Put the spotlight on the athlete, our job is to make them better people and better athletes. Last but not least coaching is FUNdamnetal. We can have fun while teaching and guiding people toward excellence. Coaching is not an industry it is a profession, therefore it demands that we be professional.
Physical Competency Assessment – A Rational Approach
Over the course of my career I have used various forms of assessment to determine the athletes readiness to train and compete. Sometimes they looked more like something you would see in physical therapy clinic and other times it was just pure end range jumping, throwing and running tests. I kept searching for an assessment tool that would give then information I was looking for. A few years ago someone suggested I look at The Functional Movement Screen, that did fit the bill for me. Too one size fits all and based on some questionable assumptions’ about the body and how it moves. I knew Kelvin Giles had started work on a Physical Competency Assessment when he was head of S&C at the Queensland Academy of Sport. It seemed to make sense, but I was missing the overview and explanation that I needed to begin to implement it. Then I met Kelvin a few years ago when we were both presenting to the English Institute of Sport S&C coaches. It was like a light went on. His physical competency approach to assessment was brilliant in its simplicity and the myriad of applications possible. It does not seek to predict potential injury, instead based on the level of the athlete’s physical competencies they are placed on an exercise continuum. It is adaptable to a wide range of sports and physical education. It is now used extensive in England and Australia. The point is that all the athletes have to reach the same destination but they will have different rates and means of progressing to that destination. I will let Kelvin explain it from here. “ I put the PCA stuff together not to be any kind of 'predictor' at all. I started to look closely at movement efficiency in squat, lunge, push, pull, brace, rotate and range plus other exercise modalities – landing, jumping etc to simply allow me and my colleagues to prescribe a more accurate program for the athletes we were coaching. My choices were confirmed by some of the great sports medical practitioners in Australia as being appropriate. There was a nice link back to the typical muscular-skeletal screening they were doing in the clinic environment as a back up. The assessment was also put together for another 'strategic' reason – I needed some evidence that the 'basics' that were supposed to be being carried out at the earlier stages of the athlete's development simply weren't being done. Training at these early stages was mostly skill and tactical specific with a little bit of Olympic Weightlifting or 'madhouse' circuits being done. By showing the movement limitations (the radar graphs) to the coaches at the earlier stages I had some chance of getting them to change things. 'Prediction' stuff is daft – you can have all the evidence you like about an athlete and then tomorrow it all changes. I have some evidence that the more competent you are the less likelihood of suffering a 'controllable' injury you have. The assessment is used to 'ring warning bells' – e.g. can't squat – WATCH OUT!……can't land a Hop & Stick – WATCH OUT! It makes us more aware of exercise selection and program construction once we know some limitations. The assessment is there to make us stop and think. For some sports it has allowed some decision makers to track the athletic development of squad members nationwide which assists in the fight against sole tactical / technical development with the developing athlete so I guess there is another little use for it. So…nothing clever at all in all this – certainly never created to be a panacea or another spell potion or gadget, just a simple tool for a teacher / coach to make a smarter decision. Some people got interested so I wrote as much down as I could and took some pictures and made a manual for them. Got fed up with difficulties in measuring so worked out the Gauges on my kitchen table with by brother-in-law. Don't overestimate it's role – you've got to be able to coach / teach in the first place! I use it to get the basics right first – not as a 'new' approach. I just want to know 'where are they now?' before making training decisions – nothing flash at all.” You can purchase the Physical Competency Assessment manual and gauge on my website www.gambetta.com The teaching of this methodology of assessment is an integral part of the GAIN Apprentorship program. In addition we will be doing workshops on the Physical Competency Assessment later in 2010. Keep checking the web site and blog for sites and dates.
This Warmed My Heart
I was sent this link to a story about the revolutionary changes in the Seattle Mariner's conditioning program. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/marinersblog/2011184657_mariners_completely_overhaulin.html I do not know the the guy who is implementing it, but I tip my hat to him. As I read it I could help but compare to what we were doing twenty years ago with the Chicago White Sox. We were doing all of this and more. In fact Don Wakamatsu, the manager of the Mariners was a player in that system whose career was revived and saved by what we did. The first day of spring training was devoted to testing. In the morning it was physical tests in the afternoon it was physical therapy evaluations. From the testing over the years we developed a database to physically profile each position in baseball. This enabled us to design a development plan for each player. In addition we used these profiles in the identification and drafting process of the players. We used biomechanical analysis to devise and revise our pitching conditioning program and design programs that met the needs of the individual pitchers. We biomechanically analyzed the starting position and running mechanics for baseball and came up with unified teaching methodology. Every player and pitcher in the minor leagues was required to workout. The program was periodized based on the phase of the season. This eliminated the staleness factor. The pitchers program was set-up in revolving five day cycles for starters and a revolving seven-day cycle for the relievers. We had a pitchers and catchers mini camp in January to assess those players and make any adjustments necessary for spring training. We had a sport psychologist working with us and used the TAIS test to help identify the coaches and the players’ attentional strengths and weaknesses. We had a nutrition program, although I will say this part of the program lagged behind the rest of the program. We trained vision early on with many of the things that people are calling cutting edge today and found them not as effective as we were led to believe. Skill and physical development were developed concurrently. After the A ball level each player had a plan to allow them to develop their abilities. There are two players from this system still playing in the Major Leagues today, Maglio Ordonez and Mike Cameron. They are poster children for what a development program can accomplish. I only had one assistant and he focused on rookie ball. That was important to get the players oriented into the “White Sox” way of physical and mental preparation for baseball. The trainers (ATC’s) were also the conditioning coaches. I was in charge of the minor league trainers and supervised the rehab. All the rehab of minor league players was done in-house in Sarasota. We set up a complete system for tracking injuries and productivity in terms of player days and pitcher days missed. Over the years were able to show significant reduction in injuries and lost days due to injuries. In nine years we only had five hamstring pulls and six groin pulls that caused players to miss days. Look at that in the context of today’s injuries and you can see we must have been doing something right. Why did this program work? Over the years I certainly have reflected on this. It worked because the general manager Larry Himes who hired me and Al Goldis his farm and scouting director gave unconditional support to the program. They involved me in the scouting process, sending me to evaluate players along side the baseball scout. It worked because I had control of the minor league trainers and was considered equal in the organization to the uniform field coordinator. It worked because Steve Odgers was the Major League conditioning guy, so that the major league players were on the same page, in other words there was continuity. It worked because Dewey Robinson our pitching coordinator believed in the program and made supervision of the pitchers conditioning part of each pitching coaches responsibility. Above all it worked because the players were sold on it. They worked their butts off. Finally this all begs the question – What happened? A change in administration brought a return to a old school philosophy. They wanted me to cut back at a time when we on the cusp of a real breakthrough, so rather than compromise I resigned the position. Sometimes I look back nostalgically on what our team of professionals was able to accomplish in a very traditional sport, in a sometimes hostile environment and I smile. I wish the Marnier program all the success in the world. I will be following their progress with great interest.
Changing Technique – Quick Fixes
It is always interesting at this time of the year at the start of spring training and with the NFL combine to read the stories of how people have changed their technique. I have been following the Tim Tebow story with great interest. Apparently he has a team of “experts’ who have completely revamped his throwing style. He is not going to unveil his new technique at the NFL CONbine, but will wait for another three weeks, choosing a more controlled environment for the great unveiling. Let's look at this with what we know of motor learning and skill acquisition. First of all he acquired his old patterns and grooved them for twenty plus years. You cannot unlearn and relearn a new technique in six weeks. You can make some style changes, but to go from a side arm slinging motion to a classic “overhead’ action will take years. The other factor is all this has been learned and practiced in a non-pressure environment. What will happen in the chaos of the game where everything is in fast forward mode? I wish I could be a fly on the wall on this one. Was there a baseline biomechanical analysis of his old throwing motion done? By that I mean 3D analysis. How much real time video analysis and feedback is he getting? To make real changes takes thousands of hours and directed practice. I maintain that the changes he is making are probably very cosmetic and he will revert to his old patterns under game pressure. For years I watched our pitching coaches when I was with the White Sox work on pitching mechanics. We had the advantage of biomechanical analysis as a baseline, but in still took time and thousands of repetitions and constant cueing. It can be done, it just can’t be done in six weeks!
Fooled By The Result
Win the game, the match or the race and everything is great. Lose the game, match or race and it is a disaster, everything is bad. In my 41 years of coaching and a few years before that as an athlete I have seen this time and again. Panic after a lose, smug satisfaction after a win, regardless of how well the players performed. For some reason coaches and teams just don’t seem to understand that you have to look beyond the score. Sometimes victories can disguise huge deficiencies and fool you into thinking things are better than they are. The 1998 US Men’s World Cup soccer team was a great example of this. Victories over Brazil and then Belgium in Europe were blown out of proportion and distorted the perspective the coaches and the media. I saw this first hand working with this team. We were not preparing for the World Cup as much as we were focusing on winning less meaningful matches that ultimately hurt the development of the team and distorted the selection process of the players. Conversely loses can be blown out of proportion unless they are thoroughly analyzed in the context of the whole season and the plan. The essential element here is to always learn from performance. The competition performance is the most essential feedback tool there is, after all that is what the goal of training is. So have a context for performance evaluation from a physical preparation, tactical and strategic perspective that is part of a systematic plan. This is what the great coach’s and athletes do, they have a perspective that allows them to objectively evaluate competitive performance and learn from it and adjust accordingly. A good sound plan lends context and perspective. Each competition result provides incremental progress toward the ultimate goal.
Functional Training – Where to Start
Functional training is training. All training is functional, it is just that some training rates higher on a continuum of function than others. If you are not sure how to make your training more functional here are a few tips that should guide you. This not rocket science, I think you will see when you analyze successful long term athletic development programs that all these elements appear in some way, shape or form. Incorporate fundamental movements and build on them. Walk, jog, run, sprint in all directions from varied starting positions and with varied rhythms. Pull and push. Bend and reach. Lift and drop. Creep and crawl. Start and stop. Hop, jump and bound. Put and throw. Roll and tumble. Do all of these movements in all planes of movement, change speed and rhythm, add or reduce resistance and systematically vary the mode of resistance. Explore all dimensions of movement in a mindful manner. Master each element. Gradually increase the complexity of the movement problems the body must solve. Combine all of this into a systematic approach that has a clear progression to a specific goal – excellence in the competitive arena.
Corrective Exercise
The latest buzzword is corrective exercise. Is corrective exercise the latest fad like “drawing in “ was a few years ago? What exactly is corrective exercise? I think I know, but it is a misleading concept. What exactly are you correcting? It sounds to me like another reductionist approach to the human body based on pseudo scientific principles and marketing. The exercises that I see labeled as corrective are remedial exercises that should be part of a training progression, not separated into a category all their own. I think we are forgetting the most important principle of training and rehab which is progression. Exercises should be set-up in a hierarchical progression from the most simple and remedial to the most difficult and complex. Not every athlete starts at the same place in the progression but they are all expected to end up the same destination – the competitive arena fully fit and ready to compete free of any physical limitations. I do not think the “corrective exercise’ approach does this. In many situations I have seen athletes with perceived deficiencies who are taken out of normal training to do “corrective exercise, “ yet they are still expected to participate in practice and yes, play the game. The end result of all this madness is the plethora of injuries we see today. The so called “corrective exercises’ need to be a transparent part of training, not separate. Each athlete can and should expect individualized programs based on their ability to perform certain movements. For example today with volleyball it is squat emphasis day. I have 24 girls’ of widely varying ability. Some are squatting with a mini band above their knee, some not, some squat full others to parallel and some will not squat yet. All of this is based on a Physical Competency Assessment. This PCA is not just a one off process, the movements are part of warm-up and I evaluate daily to assess readiness to train and progress to the next step in the progression. Once again I implore you to keep the big picture in mind and do no harm.