Author: Vernon Gambetta
Coaching Tips from Chef Bobby Flay
Yesterday I caught the end an interview with noted chef Bobby Flay. He offered two pearls of wisdom that I found very appropriate for coaches. The first one was to never rest on your laurels, constantly strive to get better, keep an edge. The second was to stress the fundamentals everyday. He reminds his chefs everyday to salt and pepper both sides of the meat. Everything is based on repetition of sound fundamentals. Food for thought and action as you begin your week.
Work Capacity – Part Two
It is important to distinguish the development of a large work capacity from the development of an aerobic base. The development of an appropriate aerobic foundation is a component part of work capacity but in sprint sports, intermittent sprint sports and transition game sports it is not anywhere near as significant a portion of the work capacity as conventional wisdom would have us believe. Even in pure endurance sports I believe the means of development of an aerobic base needs to be revisited. It is important to remember that training is cumulative. Work capacity accumulates and builds upon itself from year to year. Therefore with the aerobic component, once the capacity is increased and the aerobic power is elevated that component cannot be significantly raised. The focus needs to shift to efficiency; how the aerobic component can best contribute to performance. In the vast majority of the sports we know we need to develop an aerobic component. In the research and coaching literature we have been bombarded with the concept of the aerobic base. The fundamental dichotomy that exists is how to develop the aerobic power necessary to recover from the short intense burst of an activity that occurs in a game without compromising the explosive power necessary for optimal performance during the bursts. It is during the bursts that actual game performance is measured and decided. Here is where we need to think and act outside the box. Volumes of research literature and thousands of doctoral dissertations have been written on all the various factors of aerobic exercise. It is only recently that there has been significant work done to more specifically direct us in this area. Max VO2 is easy to measure; it is the gold standard lab test to give aerobic information. Because it is easy to measure and deeply embedded research literature do not make it correct. I maintain that it is an overrated measure. Time and effort could be better spent in other areas. For the intermittent sprint sport and transition sport athlete we do not need max VO2 tests to train the aerobic component. To better guide us in the application of work capacity concept I recommend the following principles as a guide: At younger training ages volume and general work will be the primary stimulus for adaptation. (Training age is how long an athlete has been in a formal training program.) Experience has shown us that with younger athletes virtually anything you do will make the athlete better. The more you do the better you get. This can become a trap that if this is continued as the athlete accumulates training age. Eventually it will yield diminishing returns. At advanced training ages, intensity is the stimulus for development. As the athlete progresses it becomes self-defeating to continually try to do more. The shift needs to be made to more intense work, higher quality effort and technical refinement. No component of fitness should be developed in isolation. Perhaps one of the biggest mistakes made in contemporary training is the inordinate placed on one component of fitness to the detriment of others. It is easy to fall into this, but ultimately this is unproductive. No one component is more important than another. There must be a careful blend. That is not to say that certain components would not be emphasized at certain phases of the year, but essentially all components of training should be trained during all phases, just in different proportions. The role of general work (GPP) changes with increasing training age. At the younger training ages with the developing athlete general work assumes a great emphasis. It makes up the greatest proportion of the training. As we stated in our first principle, volume will be the initial stimulus to force adaptation. As the athlete matures, because training is cumulative, general work assumes less importance. There is less need for GPP and more need for specific work and technical refinement. For the athlete of more advanced training age general work is used for regeneration and a break from more intense training.
Work Capacity – Part One
To better understand work capacity it helps to think of it this way. In order for an athlete to improve they must be able to do a certain amount of work. They must be able to work at a level that will ensure enough stress to achieve a positive training adaptation. For example, a sprinter whose general fitness limits their ability to sprint, that would significantly limit their ability to improve. Therefore our goal is to build an extensive work capacity base that fits the specific demands of the athlete’s sport and meets the athlete’s individual needs. Too often this is confused with building an aerobic base. It is much more than an aerobic base; in fact in speed/power/skill sports it is best to forget the concept of aerobic as it has traditionally has been thought of. In the language of training theory work capacity falls into the category of general physical preparation (GPP). There are three components of work capacity: The ability to tolerate a high workload – the key word here is to tolerate. Many athletes are capable of doing an occasional high workload, but cannot adapt to this workload on any kind of consistent basis. The ability to recover from the workload sufficiently for the next workout or competition. This is closely tied to the first concept. If the athlete cannot recover then they are risking overuse injuries or overtraining. They will not be able to adapt to the training stress. The capacity to resist fatigue whatever the source. It is more than aerobic, it is the ability to resist neural fatigue and mental fatigue. Refinement of the efficiency and coordination of the cardiovascular, metabolic and nervous systems. It is more than cardiovascular efficiency. It is preparing the whole athlete to be as efficient as possible. To better understand the concept of work capacity I have found it useful to think of it as those qualities that are limiting factors to the development of other qualities. It consists of those capacities and components of athletic fitness that, if deficient, would limit the ability to do more training. Those would be body composition, too fat or too lean, limited flexibility, inadequate aerobic capacity, aerobic power, anaerobic capacity, strength endurance, or anaerobic power. All of these are prerequisites for being able to handle a level of work. A limitation in any of these components would have serious implications and severely limit an athlete’s work capacity. To help better understand the concept of work capacity there are three conceptual terms. The first is capacity, which is the total amount of energy available to perform work. In simple terms it is the size of the tank. The second term is power, the amount of energy that can be produced per unit of time. The third term is efficiency, which is the optimal use of the energy available. It is efficiency that I focus on in training.
Functional Path Training Principles
These are the principles that I use to guide me on journey on the Functional Path: # 1 Have a current accurate road map – Start with a plan, execute it, and evaluate it constantly # 2 Think big picture – Build and rebuild the complete athlete # 3 Fundamental movement skills must be mastered before specific sport skills can be acquired and advanced training undertaken # 4 Learn to use the ground – Build & rebuild the athlete from the ground up # 5 Train the core as the center of the action # 6 Train sport appropriate – You are what you train to be # 7 Build a work capacity base appropriate for your sport # 8 Train Linkage – Connect toenails to fingernails # 9 Think Long-Term – Training is cumulative # 10 The individual athlete is the focus – Recognize, train and rehab the individual
The Little Things
Doing the little things is not to be confused with searching for marginal gains. Doing the little things is attention to detail, dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s. It is not spectacular, in fact the little things are almost mundane, but never the less they are very important. Taking care of business, basics, fundamentals are all words to describe the little things. Little things add up very quickly. Take an inventory of your coaching – What are the little things? Are you doing them?
Risk
Why are we trying to avoid risk? Instead of avoiding risk learn to manage it. Playing and competing at the highest levels means you are on the edge, pushing the envelope in terms of training and performance. A key to effective coaching is learning to calculate and manage risk. Without risk there is no return. In essence there is a polarization in risk exposure, it is balancing high risk high return training with lower risk lower return training. Each individual athlete responds differently based on training age, gender and the nature of the sport. You can’t red line the system all the time and expect a positive adaptation, but touching and exceeding red line in a systematic manner will yield optimum training results. Good coaching is a risk management proposition.
Invitation to a Party
Imagine that you are going to have a party and that you can invite leaders in your field. Who would you invite? What would discuss with them?
Just Thinking?
The past couple of weeks I have totally immersed myself in reading and research working to challenge myself and upgrade my knowledge. Being basically ADHD I can’t seem to focus on one area, I seem to keep coming back to the body as a complex system with a myriad of interactions and incredible ability to adapt to virtually any stress we impose upon it. One of the areas I have dug deep into is the whole epidemic of hamstring injures. The studies that I am reading just seem to ignore the hamstring as a link in the kinetic chain. (I will write a post on my thoughts and conclusions soon) This is not unique in scientific studies and the expert’s commentary in regard to all aspects of performance. It is so easy and convenient to take a reductionist approach and look at the cardiovascular system or the nervous system in isolation, but what is convenient and easy is not always correct. As a practitioner I need to see how the systems integrate to produce efficient movement. Why is there this disconnect? I found this quote from Claude Levi Strauss that made me think even more: “The scientist is not a person gives the right answers, he is one who asks the right questions.” Maybe we need more collaboration between the coaches and the sport scientists to frame better questions. Just thinking?