Techniques February 2012 by Renaissance Publishing

contents Volume 5, Number 3 February 2012

A Letter from the President

REPORTS 4

Division I Track & Field Division I Cross Country

Division II Track & Field Division II Cross Country

Division III Track & Field Division III Cross Country

High School IAAF Report

FEATURES 8

Developing Speed by Leo A. Settle

Psychological Factors Contributing to Injury by Matthew Buns, PH.D.

Strength Training by John M. Cissik

Teaching to the Test by Carl Leivers

Water: A Running Coachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Competitive Edge By Alberto Salazar

Updates from the NCAA Eligibility Center By John Pfeffenberger

AWARDS 49

2011 USTFCCCA Cross Country Regional Coaches & Athletes of the Year

Cover photograph by Michael P. Reese FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

A Letter From the President

trust that everyone enjoyed the holiday season and that you were able to spend some time with your family, friends and loved ones. By the time this edition of Techniques reaches your mailbox most of us will be back with our teams and into the indoor season. I wish everyone a successful indoor campaign, full of team success and individual personal bests and devoid of injuries!

PUBLISHER Sam Seemes EXECUTIVE EDITOR Mike Corn ASSOCIATE EDITOR Sylvia Kamp ASSOCIATE EDITOR Mason Cathey MEDIA MANAGER Tom Lewis MEMBERSHIP SERVICES Mandi Magill PHOTOGRAPHER Kirby Lee

SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE USTFCCCA CONVENTION IN SAN ANTONIO: From everything I experienced, the convention was a huge success. With over 1,100 registrants again set an all-time record for attendance at our convention. This is a testament to the continued progress of our organization and the commitment of our membership to professional growth and participation in the governance of our association. Among the many highlights of the convention I thoroughly enjoyed having Dr. Mark Emmert, the president of the NCAA, as our keynote speaker. Dr. Emmert’s message was well received and having him in attendance is another indicator that our organization is recognized as being an important national body. Grant Teaff, the director of the American Football Coaches Association, was another highprofile speaker at our convention. I appreciate Teaff’s message of how vitally important a strong professional organization is to making a positive impact on our sport. All three divisions of the NCAA discussed and debated a variety of important track & field/cross country proposals related to issues such as rule changes, recruiting, qualifying for national competition, regional realignment and meet management. I look forward to reading the minutes of each voting session to see what kind of recommendations were passed. The symposiums I attended were all excellent and I heard good things about the presentations I was not able to attend. The sharing of best practices among coaches is an integral part of what makes our convention substantive. A big thank-you to the coaches who presented and I want to encourage everyone and especially you younger coaches to be committed in sharing your knowledge and expertise at clinics, camps and symposiums whenever you can. Once again the Mondo dinner on Tuesday night was fantastic. This evening has turned into one of my favorite parts of the convention. It is a time to relax with and catch up with old friends as well as make some new connections among our coaching colleagues. This year was especially meaningful for me as almost my entire staff as well as my family was able to be in attendance. The Bowerman Award presentation was an awesome event. The production has a “big time” feel to it and adds to the professionalism of our vocation. Finally, the Hall of Fame dinner was a chance not only to honor the life’s work of some of our greatest coaches, but also to reflect on what an opportunity each of us has to make an impact on the lives of the young men and women we work with. As always, I remain committed to working with all of you to make the greatest sport in the world even better.

DR. TED BULLING PRESIDENT, USTFCCCA DIRECTOR OF TRACK & FIELD AND CROSS COUNTRY, NEBRASKA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY tab@nebrwesleyan.edu

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

EDITORIAL BOARD Larry Judge,

Boo Schexnayder, Gary Winckler

Published by Renaissance Publishing LLC 110 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Suite 123, Metairie, LA 70005 (504) 828-1380 www.myneworleans.com

USTFCCCA

National Office 1100 Poydras Street, Suite 1750 New Orleans, LA 70163 Phone: 504-599-8900 Fax: 504-599-8909

techniques (ISSN 1939-3849) is published quarterly in February, May, August, and November by the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association. Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publisher. techniques is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, photos and artwork even if accompanied by a self-addressed stamped envelope. The opinions expressed in techniques are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the magazines' managers or owners. Periodical Postage Paid at New Orleans La and Additional Entry Offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: USTFCCCA, PO Box 55969, Metairie, LA 70055-5969. If you would like to advertise your business in techniques, please contact Mike Corn at (504) 599-8900 or mike@ustfccca.org.

NCAA REPORT

Division l Track & Field and Cross Country

RON MANN

BARRY HARWICK

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION I TRACK AND FIELD COACHES

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION I CROSS COUNTRY COACHES

he USTFCCCA Convention has become a great source to motivate, inform and energize me beyond my greatest expectations. Having the NCAA president, Dr. Mark Emmert, and AFCA Executive Director, Grant Teaff, speak at our December convention is one indication of our value as an association. These speakers also challenged us to continue to promote the value of the sport of track and field in our universities. In addition, I was particularly excited about the first-ever Women’s Summit conducted following the convention and believe it was a great success. I want to thank all of you who attended and participated in the convention. There were over 1100 coaches attending the various symposiums, business meetings, executive sessions, and expositions. It was a delight to see so much energy and excitement among our coaches and sponsors! Under our new proposal submission process, we discussed all items that were submitted as proposals, but only “time-sensitive” items were voted on at this convention. We’ll continue to discuss those non-time-sensitive items that were submitted and vote on them at the 2012 Convention.

WE VOTED AS A BODY TO SUPPORT: • Pursuing the addition of a one-week early signing period in November for Track & Field and Cross Country • Pursuing the application of all relevant conversions to qualifying marks in the multi-events indoors • Pursuing the addition of information relevant to the conduct of regular-season scoring meets in the rule book • Pursuing a change to our Championship policies to grant coaches of the host institution at national championships the same access to the championship facilities as visiting coaches • Expanding All-Academic criteria for the multi-events outdoors to more closely match the indoor criteria. With the help of your Executive Committee and the national office, we will pursue these changes through the appropriate channels, and I will continue to keep you informed on our progress. I want to convey my personal thanks for the honor of serving as your Division I Track & Field president. I am truly humbled and will work hard to represent you well. This is my first year of service in a two-year term. I am very appreciative of your cooperation and willingness to work together for the improvement of our sport. As we each move through the 2012 spring indoor and outdoor seasons, let us continue to work toward the valuable actions we took at convention. Ron Mann is the Head Men’s & Women’s Track & Field Coach at the University of Louisville. Ron can be reached at ron.mann@louisville.edu 4

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

hen I was preparing for the convention earlier in the fall, a coach called to ask me if I thought the convention was worth attending. I gave him a very positive response, and he made the trip to San Antonio. I am pretty confident that he got a lot out of the experience, along with the record-setting number of other attendees. For those not at the convention, here is a quick list of some of the major topics discussed: We had long conversations and very favorable response to ranking 64 teams at the end of the season. Tom Lewis did a tremendous job in pulling together a sample 64-team ranking based on an RPI formula similar to that used in several other NCAA sports. (We will be posting this on the website as well). I am chairing a committee to further this work. Our goal for the year ahead is to fine-tune Tom’s work, as well as to consider other models. I look forward to your comments. In addition to the publicity that ranking 64 teams will provide, another goal is to pursue Learfield Cup points for more programs. We established a committee to make recommendations on the minimum course length to allow a race to count for at large points. Kevin Hadsell of Toledo will chair that committee. We had long discussions on what criteria our voters should use in the national and regional polls. Our first vice-president, Sean Cleary of West Virginia, is in charge of the polls, and his committee will have revised guidelines in place before the 2012 XC season. The Executive Committee was asked to begin to provide feedback to the NCAA Track & Field Committee in regard to general philosophies about our national meet site. Do we want a permanent site? A geographic rotation? A limited number of alternating sites? Please submit your feedback on this topic to your regional representatives. We are working with the national office to have a system in place for cross country that will be very similar to the TFRRS model we use in track & field. This will enable all of us to have one site to check results and will particularly help our voters in the weekly polls. Under our new rules of order, agenda items are brought forth and discussed at one convention and then voted on the following year unless they are time-sensitive. During the time between conventions, an agenda item can be discussed, studied, and amended. When we get to Orlando in 2012, we can expect a busy final day voting on many of the topics we discussed this year. Let me close by thanking everyone who attended this year. I have attended these conventions for 20 years, and I still feel that I learn new things, get new ideas, and meet new people every year. I hope your experience was just as positive. Best of luck to you and your team in the New Year.

Barry Harwick is the Head Men’s Track & Field and Cross Country Coach at Dartmouth College. Barry can be reached at Barry.Harwick@Dartmouth.EDU

NCAA REPORT

Division ll Track & Field and Cross Country

STEVE GUYMON

MARLON BRINK

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION II TRACK & FIELD COACHES

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION II CROSS COUNTRY COACHES

he 2011 year has wrapped up and, as is often the case, it is a good time to reflect back on the highlights, while also looking ahead to see what the upcoming year has in store for us. We recently concluded the most well attended USTFCCCA Convention ever. It was my first year as the Division II Cross Country president, and I must say that I have a new respect for the work of the presidents that have gone before me. The USTFCCCA staff does such a great job behind the scenes to make it a tremendous event for us as coaches. It was exciting to see so many fellow coaches working together to share ideas on ways we can improve our sport. Not only was there record attendance overall, but it was also true for Division II. We, as Division II coaches, can be proud of the fact that we have the highest percentage of programs as USTFCCCA members in 2011(96.26%) of all three NCAA Divisions. There are still several cross-country only programs that have not joined USTFCCCA. Hopefully, we can encourage those programs to see the benefits of being part of a great organization that helps to promote cross-country to the highest levels. The Bowerman and Hall of Fame induction ceremony were again outstanding events that make you proud to be a cross country/track & field coach. A couple items that Division II Cross Country coaches discussed and decided at Convention include: Expanding the XC Rankings to the top 35 to better reflect the depth of teams going to Nationals. Request that 64 teams, based on National and Regional finish, be used in the Learfield Cup Standings Results. Submitting to the NCAA a proposal that during the Fall Festival years to host the NCAA National Championships the traditional weekend prior to Thanksgiving at the host city. The 2011 cross country season is now in the history books. It was a very memorable and exciting competition, held on a cold and snowy course in Spokane, Washington. Augustana College (SD) women’s team won their first ever team championship with a very close margin over Western State. Western State men’s team picked up their ninth team championship and first since 2005 with a commanding win over Adam’s State. Looking ahead to 2012, the National Championship meet will have 32 teams and 24 individuals (the largest field in Division II history) and will be hosted in Joplin, Missouri by Missouri Southern State University. The 2012 convention will move to Orlando for a two-year stay. Please make plans to attend and make it another record-breaking event! I look forward to continue serving as your cross country president and working with you in 2012!

Steve Guymon is the Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field Coach at Harding University. Steve can be reached at sguymon@harding.edu

Marlon Brink is Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field and Cross Country coach at Wayne State College. Marlon can be reached at mabrink1@wsc.edu

would like to thank the USTFCCCA staff for all the hard work in making the 2011 USTFCCCA Convention a success. Speaking on behalf of the Division II coaches we are extremely fortunate to have this group represent us. Thank you also to all coaches that came to the convention for your participation and efforts to make Division II Track & Field better. I would like to thank Aaron Russell for his leadership as our Executive Council Chairman for the past two years, and for all his hard work. Damon Martin was elected by his peers at the convention as the succeeding Chairman. Congratulations to Damon and we look forward to the next two years under his leadership. During the convention many ideas and proposals were brought forth and voted on by our membership body. There were many hours spent in meetings discussing these items. All the different committees did a fine job. The Division II Athlete Hall of Fame inductees were chosen at convention and the names will be released at a later time by the USTFCCCA national office. Executive Committee and membership decisions on these items and others can be found online under Division II Proposals. Recognizing the top eight finishers in each individual event at the NCAA II Championships as 1st Team All American and recognizing ninth through 12th as 2nd Team All American. Relays teams will continue to only recognize the top 8 as All American. Regardless of field size, leave the 3K as a straight final. (Passed) In the Indoor Championships place the 5K on Friday between the 200 M prelims and the DMR. Start the running events on Friday at 3:30 PM. Place the 3K on Saturday in the current 5K time slot. (Passed) Set the track & field practice season start date as the first Monday in October. (Passed) To have the minimum desired field size for the competition for the NCAA Outdoor Championships as 20 for Individual Events, 16 for the Multi Events and 14 for Relay Events. (Passed) To have the minimum desired field size for the competition for the NCAA Indoor Championships as 16 for Individual Events, 14 for the Multi Events and 12 for Relay Events. (Passed) Recommend to the selection committee that they break ties to have the desired field sizes at the NCAA Championship and adopt the Division I formula except for last line in the formula. (Passed) To bring back the early signing date in November and leave the February date the same. (Passed) Finally, two other items brought up at the convention were pertaining to those hosting meets: Have long jump and triple jump pits level all the way across with sand. If possible use the standard names of the events (available online). I wish each of you the best this season!

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

NCAA REPORT

Division llI Track & Field and Cross Country

CHRIS HALL

GREG HUFFAKER

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION III TRACK & FIELD COACHES

PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION III CROSS COUNTRY COACHES

s I write this report the 2011 USTFCCCA convention has just recently come to a close and the 2012 track season is now in full swing. I want to take a moment to look back at convention and pass along information.

THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT.

Current Issues: • Further clarification of the fixed field size in qualifying. • Breaking Ties for the final qualifying position. • How Academic All-America will be obtained with the elimination of a provisional standard. • The schedule for the indoor and outdoor NCAA championships.

Future Issues: • Adding event(s) to the indoor championships. • Indexing of tracks While the topic of the “fixed field size” continued to be discussed it seemed that the members in attendance had a pretty good handle on how the numbers were arrived at and the way this new procedure would be implemented. The two primary concerns that needed further clarification were based upon tiebreaking procedures for the final qualifying spots and not losing any bodies in the meet itself. What drew the greatest concern though was breaking ties for a final qualifying position. While the coaches have an acceptance of the importance of breaking ties they have a major concern that it never come to a coin-flip to determine a participant in the meet. While it is highly unlikely it would come to this the coaches are asking the NCAA to consider adding a person to the meet if every other tie-breaking option is exhausted. Moving to the future it appears likely that the indoor national meet will be increasing in size. The NCAA is currently proposing adding 44 men and 44 women to the national meet. With this increase in numbers the coaches were asked to make suggestions of how they would like to expand the meet. After a great deal of discussion the body felt the addition of a 200 meter and 3000 meter race to the indoor championships along with an increase of 2 people per open event would be the best move forward. It also appears that with the start of the 2013 season we will finally have a formula in place for converting times based upon events run on a banked or oversized tracks. I feel that this is an exciting time in our sport with a number of changes being made. This will hopefully be something that reenergizes everyone. Best of luck this season. Chris Hall is the Head Men’s & Women’s Cross Country and Track & Field coach at the University of Chicago. He can be reached at hallc@uchicago.edu

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

f you were not able to attend the 2011 USTFCCCA convention you missed a historic convention for our entire organization, as well as for NCAA Division III cross country. This was the first time that a Division III coach assumed the Presidency of USTFCCCA. This was also our first convention with Dr. Ted Bulling of Nebraska Wesleyan doing a terrific job leading our entire professional organization. Much of the conversation in our cross country meetings was again focused on regional realignment. The NCAA’s current proposal focuses on regional realignment based on conference affiliation and aims at having all eight region sports (baseball, softball, volleyball, soccer, etc) compete in the same region for every sport. After much discussion the executive committee brought forward a working model for regional realignment for approval to the entire membership. This plan focused on the following principles: Advance the best field to the NCAA National Championship finals (this would involve raising or eliminating the cap of teams that can advance from each region) Maintain regional representation at the National Championship (keep two automatic qualifiers from each region) Balance number of teams in each region Geographically centered regions but not confined to state lines By splitting some states and shifting where some states have traditionally competed at their regional championships, we were able to better balance the number of teams in each of the eight regions. Because this would affect the strength of some regions and with the overall sentiment seeming to be in favor of the highest quality national field, a proposal was made to completely remove the cap of teams allowed to advance out of a region. Eventually both of these proposals were overwhelmingly approved in our voting session. Other important developments include: A recommendation that at the Regional and National Championships the assistant starter would stand behind the starting line to watch for a fall in the first 100 meters, while two additional recall officials would be located 150-200 meters from the start line. The goal would be to have the recall officials with flags to provide a visual cue to the competitors that the race has been recalled. Other highlights: A recommendation for the immediate announcing of unofficial team scores and posting of unofficial results at the Regional and National Championships. A recommendation for the publicizing of Regional and National box assignments prior to first course inspection. The election of Dara Ford, John Carroll College as the 2nd Vice President. Once again a quick synopsis fails to capture the depth of the conversation and how some opinions were changed, highlighting the importance of attending the convention in person!

Greg Huffaker is the Head Men’s and Women’s Cross Country Coach at Illinois Wesleyan University and can be reached at ghuffake@iwu.edu

HIGH SCHOOL REPORT

IAAF COACHES COMMISSION REPORT VICTOR LOPEZ

WAYNE CLARK

CHAIRMAN, IAAF COACHES COMMISSION

ongratulations to the USTFCCCA staff for organizing another outstanding convention. For those of you who have not gotten a chance to attend, this professional gathering is a must experience for you as soon as possible. The high school sessions were wellthought, educational and meaningful. Outstanding clinicians delivered useful information for us to take home and share with our team and other coaches in our area. With the new year upon us, I have posted my 2012 coaching resolutions. If you are a seasoned coach, perhaps some reflection on these thoughts will refresh your coaching desire. If you are a new coach, I hope these resolutions might give you some thought about becoming an effective and meaningful scholastic track & field coach.

NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTIONS FOR THE SCHOLASTIC TRACK & FIELD COACH: • I will make my program more appealing to ALL the students in my school by being a positive salesperson throughout the school day. I will increase my roster size as much as possible so more student/athletes will enjoy participation in our great sport. • I will better prepare for each practice with meaningful training sessions. I will make each workout productive, teaching the relationship between previous days and future workouts. I will “sell” the importance of each workout. • I will increase praise for every team member. It’s easy to criticize teens for not working to their abilities and potential, but more important to find the “good” in each individual. • I will encourage all program stakeholders to become more involved in my program. This includes giving appropriate credit and thanks to my assistant coaches for doing a good job with the athletes in their coaching specialties. • I will continue to grow as an educator/coach by reading and active communication with other professionals in my domain. The learning process never stops. • I will be more active in my local, state, and/or national professional coaching associations. No one is an island. I, also, have much to share with my fellow coaches. • I will continue the track & field tradition of helping opposing coaches and athletes improve their coaching and competitive abilities. I will treat opposing coaching staff and athletes with respect. • I will accept that winning is only a pleasant by-product of the educational nature of coaching track & field. • I am aware that, as a scholastic coach, I am a role model for all of my student-athletes. Even when I am not at the practice or competition, my lifestyle will reflect how I want my student-athletes to live. • I will promote a student-centered coaching philosophy by teaching life skills, healthy lifestyle, sportsmanship and citizenship. Yes, I think if I can achieve these resolutions, my sport will be in good hands for 2012. Wayne Clark is the Clinic Chair of the Ohio Association of Track and Cross Country Coaches. He can be reached at clark002@columbus.rr.com.

n behalf of the IAAF Coaches Commission and the World Coaches Community, I would like to wish you a Happy New Year and a 2012 full of health, happiness and success with your teams. This year marks the celebration of the 100th Anniversary of the IAAF, an organization that was founded in Stockholm, Sweden in 1912. Therefore the IAAF has scheduled a number of activities all over the world during the year to celebrate this milestone. I would like to encourage you to visit the IAAF web page to get information about all the activities which are planned for 2012 and to participate in some of those activities, especially the ones dealing with coaching development. The celebration will culminate in Barcelona, Spain in November where the IAAF will be hosting the annual gala and inaugurating the IAAF Hall of Fame. In our hemisphere, The Americas, a number of activities will be run by our different organizations: CACAC, NACAC, NACACTFCA and the newly founded Association of Panamerican Athletics-APA. Once again, I would like to encourage the USTFCCCA members to join the rest of the coaches of the world in the celebration of the 100th Anniversary of the IAAF, the organization which was the foundation of the Olympic movement. We are very happy to inform you that the coaching development movement is moving forward and every year we see more coaches activities being organized such as: courses, seminars, conferences, symposiums, conventions with a large number of coaches participating. This is a product of the leadership behind all the coaches’ organizations and of the individual coaches seeking professional development. The 2011 NACACTFCA Congress was held in the beautiful city of Mérida, Yucatán-México in October with the participation of world-renowned experts such as Carlos Cavalheiro from Brazil, Raul Barreda from Cuba/Mexico, David Johnston from USA and Peter Pratt from the Bahamas. I would like to remind you that the 2012 NACACTFCA Congress is going to be held in beautiful Nassau, Bahamas in October 2012 with a lineup of world class experts. For more information and to download the conferences from previous congresses please visit: www.nacactfca.org. The year 2011, as always, culminated with the USTFCCCA Annual Convention with more than 1,100 coaches attending and we would like to congratulate the USTFCCCA national office for organizing a first class event that definitely is making a significant contribution to our coaches in all aspects of their life, especially in their professional enhancement. Stay involved. Best wishes and success in 2012.

Victor Lopez can be reached at victorlp8@aol.com.

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DEVELOPING T 8

here are many methods for developing speed. An athlete’s ability to accelerate and sprint is based on the ability to generate large force production in the lower musculature extremities. Evidence-based literature suggests that “highresistance strength training (HRST)” exercises are an effec-

techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1

tive way to increase strength and enhance power. Strength coaches traditionally prescribe HRST static exercises like the squat and dead lift and Olympic-style exercises like the power clean, jerk and snatch. Research has indicated a significant correlation between sprinting performance over

MICHAEL P. REESE PHOTO

SPEED various distances and HRST. Different forms of HRST increase an athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s motor unit recruiting capability. Therefore, the concept of maximizing transfer of HRST, maximizing type II motor unit recruiting and activity-based training for performance is paramount to speed development.

A NEUROLOGICAL APPROACH BY LEO A. SETTLE

NEUROLOGICAL ADAPTATIONS The challenge coaches are confronted with is how a sprinter can capitalize on strength and power from HRST without significant weight gain. For sprinters, neuromuscular adaptation seems to be primarily more important than hypertrophy. FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DEVELOPING SPEED

Hypertrophy is the result of muscle tissues increasing in size. Significant weight gain is detrimental to leanly built athletes seeking a way to enhance performance. Sprinting is influenced by neuromuscular functions, and the contributing muscles must be activated at the appropriate times and intensities to maximize speed. Athletes’ performance improvement during the initial weeks of training is due to neurological adaptation. Speed development, HRST, and plyometric training cause physiological adaptation in the neuromuscular junction. The junction between the terminal of a motor neuron and muscle fibers is known as the neuromuscular junction. The functions of the neuromuscular junction are to transmit signals from the motor neuron to the skeletal muscle fibers quickly and reliably, and to control skeletal muscle contraction, and therefore voluntary movement (Hong & Etherington, 2011). As an athlete’s training increases, the distance between the motor neuron and muscle fibers shortens, allowing for increasingly rapid efferent electrical potential communication from the spinal cord. The shorter distance may allow athletes to produce higher force per foot-to-ground contact. In the adaptation of muscle fiber to physical training factors such as exercise intensity, duration, and frequency are crucial issues. Sport-specific training coupled with HRST is imperative to achieve performance improvement. Acceleration and sprinting performance can be significantly enhanced with an increase in POWER CLEAN the amount of motor unit recruitment during ground contact. Different types of MEN motor units are randomly Average 1.30 present in the skeletal muscle Good 1.50 and classified into three types: Slow (I), fast (IIa) and fast subExcellent 1.70 type (IIb). Motor units are activated when an athlete voluntarily contracts the demanded muscle for a task. The athlete’s brain transmits an efferent signal from the spinal cord to the muscle to regulate the motor unit’s recruitment. Motor units are generally recruited according to the size principle. Force production by a muscle is regulated by the numbers of fibers recruited for that particular activity. Endurance athletes recruit small motor units, type I muscle fibers, for lowintensity demands of aerobic training. Long-distance running (3-6 times a week) causes hypertrophy in type I fibers, but atrophy (size reduction) in type IIa and IIb fibers, so this type of adaptation will result in reduction of muscle mass and strength. The associated training intensity is too low and the duration too high for power athletes. Athletes performing long-term endurance and aerobic activities use asynchronous motor unit firing. Their motor units are not recruited at the same time; like the pistons in an engine they rotate in and out to sustain the performance throughout the activity. Sprinters and explosive athletes recruit larger motor units, type IIa and lIb muscle fibers because of the high-intensity demand. The training load requires near-maximum contrac-

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

tion to perform the exercises in a short time span so the high-intensity demand uses synchronous firing. Theoretically, synchronous firing means a high percentage of the type I, IIa and lIb motor units are all contracted at once for maximum force production. Literature review suggests sprinters and strength athletes exhibit greater synchronization than untrained individuals, and HRST is linked to increase synchronization. The neurological ability to increase power without hypertrophy is crucial for optimal running speed. When the type I, IIa and lIb motor units have a high percentage contract at once during an exercise, then maximum force of the muscle is generated. This will increase an athlete’s strength-to-bodyweight ratio. Think of this analogy, an athlete wants to be like a light sport car with a powerful engine that allows it to maximize driving speed. The following strength standard ratios were outlined for world-class speed athletes by Dintiman, Ward, and Tellez (1997). The numbers indicated are one rep maximums relative to bodyweight. Multiply the athletes’ strength standard number by their body weights (pounds) and the products are the goals. Example: Excellent power clean for a male weighing 165 LBS x 1.70 = 280 LBS

BACK SQUAT - KNEE BEND 90˚ WOMEN

1.10 1.30 1.50

Average Good Excellent

MEN

WOMEN

2.10 2.70 2.70

1.80 2.10 2.70

IMPLEMENTING CONCURRENT TRAINING Absolute speed sessions, plyometrics, and HRST are different forms of power development, which enhance one’s performance, and any other innovative training methods should consist of the three mentioned components. Kotzamandis, Chtzopoulos, Michailidis, Papaiakovou and Patikas observed that subjects’ 30-meter sprint performances were significantly greater in the group with HRST and sprint training when compared to just weight training (Bruce-Low & Smith, 2007). Their research supports the theory that sports performance may increase with concurrent HRST and sport-related activities. Young, using the data of Wilson et al (8 weeks of strength training with the squat exercise), produced a 21 percent gain in the one-repetition-maximum (1 RM) squat (Young, 2006), and the squat increase was accompanied by a 40-meter sprint improvement of 2.3 percent. In the short sprints, hundredths of a second can be crucial in separating gold from

DEVELOPING SPEED

silver medals, and an athlete who achieves a 2.3 percent annual improvement will have an advantage. To qualify for the 2011 NCAA Track & Field Championships, an athlete was required to have a top-12 performance at either of two collegiate regional meets. The 12th-best qualifying performance at the 2011 NCAA West Regional Track & Field Championships for the Men’s 100 meters was 10.52 seconds. If an athlete’s personal best (P.B.) is 10.65 seconds, and he improves by 2.3 percent, his new P.B. performance will be 10.41 seconds. According to the literature, increasing his strength in the squat would enhance his chances of qualifying for the NCAA Championships.

ABSOLUTE SPEED SESSIONS Speed development training should be performed at the beginning of practice when the athlete is fresh and fully recovered from a hard training session. The central nervous

If the goal of a speed development program is to maximize short distance/ sprinting speed, the training sessions should be of low volume and high intensity, and performed under conditions where fatigue is not a factor. system is highly fatigue-prone (particularly at high intensities), and it is unlikely that 100 percent effort will be possible at the conclusion of a regular practice session (Warpeha, 2007). HRST for the lower body should be performed on speed development days to complement the type IIa and IIb training adaptation. When speed development is done at the end of practice, fatigue from the previous work load, however insignificant, will compromise the speed training. Athletes who participate in absolute speed sessions when fatigued will hinder optimal results in speed development. The volume of absolute speed training and resistance training sessions is crucial and can be detrimental if prescribed in large amounts. The type IIa and lIb muscle fibers are highly fatigable, and if an athlete overloads these fibers, the onset of over training is plausible. Absolute speed is developed with relatively low volume of 95-100 percent intensity with the emphasis on quality, not quantity. Two main objectives to consider are: If the goal of a speed development program is to maxi-

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

mize short distance/sprinting speed, the training sessions should be of low volume and high intensity (longer rest periods aid in accomplishing this), and performed under conditions where fatigue is not a factor. The training distance should be 40-60 meters or flying 30 meters.

TESTING YOUR SPEED, STRENGTH, EXPLOSIVENESS AND POWER: THE MAX JONES QUADRATHLON The Max Jones Quadrathlon was developed in 1982 by Max Jones to assess athletes’ progress during the off-season training phase. Initially, the Great Britain National Throws Squad implemented the Quad test to assess speed, strength, explosiveness and power of athletes on the squad (Dunn and McGill, 2003). It has been primarily used in this country to assess anaerobic power in collegiate track athletes and football players. The Quad test is relatively easy to administer. The Quad test consists of the standing long jump (SLJ), standing triple jump (STJ), overhead back (OHB) and 30meter acceleration. The Quad test can be administrated several times throughout the year, or the components may be used as training units. The athlete gets three attempts at event with the greatest distance or fastest time recorded. The best distance and time is evaluated on a scoring sheet. The four components of the Quad test: Standing Long Jump: Athletes stand at the edge of the long jump runway facing the sand pit with body erect, and then aggressively lower hips with controlled momentum and bending 90 degrees into a squat position, they explosively jump in a horizontal direction into the sand pit, using both feet for furthest distance from take-off point. Measure and record in meters the distance hopped from the starting line to the first body impression in the sand pit. Standing Triple Jump: The coach places a fixed piece of tape on the runway for the starting line about 7 to 8 meters (females 6-7 meters) from the pit. Athletes stand on the long jump runway facing the sand pit, with body erect, aggressively lower hips with controlled momentum and bending into a squatting position, they explosively jump in a horizontal direction hopping on one foot, alternating to another hop on the opposite foot, and landing in the sand pit. Measure and record in meters the distance hopped from the starting line to the first body impression in the sand pit. Thirty-Meter Sprint: The automatic timing system may be used to record 30-meter acceleration times. The most popular automatic timing system comes with a touch pad: 4 infrared eyes with built-in transmitters, tripods for the transmitters and a handheld display that records the time of the test to 0.01 second. The touch pad is placed on the starting line, and two transmitters on tripods at the finish line of the 30 meter path. The athlete assumes a three-point starting position, or comes out of starting blocks with one hand on the touch pad. The system starts immediately once the subject accelerates, and the time appears on the handheld display once the transmitters’ infrared beams are broken. A stopwatch may be use as an alternative. Overhead Back (Men: 16lbs; Women: 4kgs): Athlete stands on the shot put ring toe board with feet shoulder width apart,

MICHAEL P. REESE PHOTO

facing the back of the ring (away from the throwing sector). The athlete holds the shot with both hands and aggressively lowers hips with controlled momentum, bends into a squatting position, and then explosively extends the legs (moving upward and backwards) throws the shot backward and into the throwing sector. Measure and record in meters the shot impression to the back edge of the toe board. If equipment is not accessible for administering the Quad Test, then the alternative would be plyometrics. Coaches can be creative with plyometric training using a variety of exercises including: bounding, power skips, stadium double legs hops and box jumps. Remember, the key is maximum effort with a low volume (20-50 jumps total a session is recom-

mended).

FATIGUE Nervous system fatigue can be grouped into two categories, central and peripheral. Fatigue is defined as a decline in muscle performance associated with the given activity. The human nervous system is complex, and research into fatigue is still in the early stages. Currently, researchers have fatigue theories with debate over which are the primary causes and which have little effect. Fatigue at the point of origin is known as central fatigue. Since the CNS originates in the motor cortex, it may affect emotional state motivation. Imbalance of athletesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DEVELOPING SPEED training volume and intensity can lead to CNS fatigue. This fatigue can happen when the athlete is overloaded with many repetitions of sprinting or near-1RM lifts. CNS fatigue does not affect performance muscles directly, but it can reduce power output. Peripheral nervous system (PNS) fatigue is localized in the trained muscle. For example, in a 100-meter full-effort sprint, PNS fatigue is likely to occur in the hamstring and hip extensor muscle groups. Muscle activation of maximum and submaximum efforts causes change in their properties and micro tears. PNS fatigue is also induced from the accumulation of

The recommendation for active recovery days is a low-demanding training session, light technical lifting or even an enjoyable cross-training session.

Start & Absolute Acceleration (0-20 meters) – These training sessions may be implemented on Mondays/Wednesdays or Thursdays during the whole year. • Sled Pulls @ 10-30 meters • Starts @ 10-30 meters • Standing Long Jump, Triple Jump, Overhead Back • (Measurable Jumps and Throw) • Bounding Drills Transition (20-30 meters) - The athlete gradually rises from acceleration to a tall and slightly forward leaning position. These training sessions may be implemented once a week on Mondays or Wednesdays. Perform these sessions during early to competition season. • Max Velocity/Absolute Speed (30-60 meters) • 3 x flying 30 meters • 3x 40-60m @ 95-100% Speed Maintenance / Speed Endurance (80-150m) - This phase is a gradual decline of velocity due to muscle PNS fatigue. The athlete that fatigues the least appears to be running faster to the finish line. These training sessions may be implemented after starts, Tuesday, or Thursdays. • 3-5 x 80meters @ 95-100% • 80, 120, 150 meters @ 90-95% • 8x100m @ 85% with 90sec recovery

phosphate in the muscle. This accumulation contributes to insufficient release of calcium for the demanded work load(Allen, 2004). The byproduct is also known as lactic acid. PNS fatigue is acute, and should not produce long lasting fatigue.

Lifting Program – The lifting sessions may be implemented two days a week. • Power Clean 3x75% 3x80% 2x2 @ 85% • Bench Press 3x6 @ 80-60% • Back Squat 3x3 @ 75-65% • Dead Lift 2x2 @ 95-80% (% of your back squat)

ACTIVE RECOVERY DAY

REFERENCES

The purpose of active recovery sessions is to allow the body to recover, or freshen up, from competition or a physically demanding session. The misperception that recovery after competition or demanding training session is improved with slow, long distance training is not indicated in relevant literature. The recommendation for active recovery days is a lowdemanding training session, light technical lifting or even an enjoyable cross-training session. These activities would be much more effective and reduce unnecessary interference of strength and power gains.

Allen, D.G. (2004) Skeletal muscle function: Role of ionic changes in fatigue, damage and disease. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology, 31 (8), 485-493 Bruce-Low, S., Smith, D. (2007) Explosive Exercise in Sports Training: A Critical Review. Official Journal of Exercise Physiology online, 10 (1), 21-33 Dintiman, G., Ward, R., & Tellez, T. (1997). Sports Speed. Champaign, Illinois: Human KineticsBooks. Dunn, G.D., and McGill, K. (2003) The Throws Manual, Third Edition. Mountain View, CA: Track and Field News Press Hong, I. H. and Etherington, S. J. (2011) Neuromuscular Junction. eLS Warpeha, J. (2007) Principles of Speed Training. National Strength and Conditioning Association’s Performance training Journal, 6 (3), 6-7 Young, W.B. (2006) Transfer of Strength and Power Training to Sports Performance. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 1, 74-83

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Speed development is not complex; innovative training that incorporates adequate HRST, absolute speed sessions (40-60 meters), plyometrics and sufficient recovery is essential to the process. Athletes may benefit from training that induces activation of inactive type lIa and lIb motor units. Athletes who regularly perform sustained aerobic exercises could negatively decrease power development because fast muscle fibers are not recruited to the same extent in low-intensity exercise. The ability to overcome inertia and accelerate to reach max velocity is crucial for performance.

SUGGESTED TRAINING WITH COMPETITION ON SATURDAYS

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

Leo Settle is an assistant Track & Field coach at the University of Texas at El Paso overseeing the Men’s Sprints, Hurdles and Jumps for the Miners.

PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS

CONTRIBUTING TO INJURY BY MATTHEW BUNS, PH.D.

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

KIRBY LEE PHOTO FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

P S YC H O LO G I C A L FAC TO R S C O N T R I BU T I N G TO I N J U RY

HYSICAL FACTORS ARE THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ATHLETIC INJURIES, but psychological fac-

tors also contribute. Sport psychologists have helped clarify the role that psychological factors play in athletic injuries. Figure 1 shows a simplified version of their model. You can see that in this model, the relation between athletic injuries and psychological factors centers on stress. In particular, a potentially stressful track and field situation (e.g., competition, important practice, poor performance) can contribute to injury, depending on the athlete and how threatening he or she perceives the situation to be. A situation perceived as threatening increases state anxiety, which causes a variety of changes in focus or attention and muscle tension (e.g., distraction and tightening up). This in turn leads to an increased chance of injury. See figure 1. Stress isn’t the only psychological factor to influence track

and field injuries, however. As you can also see in Figure 1, personality factors, a history of stressors, and coping resources all influence the stress process and, in turn, the probability of injury. Furthermore, after someone sustains an injury, these same factors influence how much stress the injury causes and the athlete’s subsequent rehabilitation and recovery. Athletes who develop psychological skills (e.g., goal setting, imagery, and relaxation) deal better with stress, reducing both their chances of being injured and the stress of injury should it occur. It has also been suggested that the stress-athletic injury model can be extended to explain not only physical injuries but also physical illnesses that may result from the combination of intense physical training and the psychosocial variables (Petrie & Perna, 2004). Thus, the model may be useful in explaining why athletes develop infections, poor adaption to training and physical complaints when highly stressed.

HOW DO INJURIES HAPPEN? As mentioned, physical factors are the primary causes of

Figure 1. A model of stress and athletic injury. Adapted from M. Andersen and J. Williams, 1988, “A model of stress and athletic injury: Prediction and prevention,” Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 10(3): 297.

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

KIRBY LEE PHOTO

track and field injuries. However, psychological factors have also been found to play a role. Personality factors, stress levels and certain predisposing attitudes have all been identified (Williams & Andersen, 2007). As psychological antecedents to athletic injuries. In fact, in one recent study, up to 18 percent of time loss because of injury was explained by psychosocial factors (Smith, Ptacek, & Patterson, 2000). Personality Factors. Personality traits were among the first psychological factors to be associated with athletic injuries. Investigators wanted to understand whether such traits as self-concept, introversion-extroversion, and tough-mindedness were related to injury. For exam-

ple, would runners with low self-concepts have higher injury rates than their counterparts with high self-concepts? Unfortunately, most of the research on personality and injury has suffered from inconsistency and the problems that have plagued sport personality research in general (Feltz, 1984). Of course, this does not mean that personality is not related to track & field injury rates; it means that to date we have not successfully identified or measured the particular personality characteristics associated with injury. In fact, recent evidence (Ford, Eklund & Gordon, 2000) shows that personality factors such as optimism, self-esteem, hardiness and trait anxiety do play a role in athletic injuries.

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

P S YC H O LO G I C A L FAC TO R S C O N T R I BU T I N G TO I N J U RY

Stress Levels. Stress levels, on the other hand, have been identified as important antecedents of athletic injuries. Research has examined the relation between life stress and injury rates (Andersen & Williams, 1988). Measures of these stresses focus on major life changes, such as losing a loved one, moving to a different town, getting married, or experiencing a change in economic status. Such minor stressors and daily hassles as driving in traffic have also been studied. Overall, the evidence suggests that athletes with higher level of stress experience 20

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

more injuries than those with less stress in their lives, with 85 percent of the studies verifying that this relationship exists (Williams & Andersen, 2007). Thus, track & field coaches should ask about major changes and stressors in athletesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lives and, when such changes occur, carefully monitor and adjust training regimens as well as provide psychological support. Stress and injuries are related in complex ways. A study of 452 male and female high school athletes addressed the relation between stressful life events; social and emotional support

who have low self-esteem, are pessimistic, anxious, and low in hardiness (Ford et al., 2000) experience more athletic injuries or lose more time as a result of their injuries. Coaches should be on the lookout for these atrisk individuals. This finding supports the Andresen and Williams model (Figure 1), emphasizing the importance of looking at the multiple psychological factors in the stress-injury relationship. Research has identified the specific stress sources for athletes when injured and when rehabilitating from injury (Podlog & Eklund, 2006). Interestingly, the greatest sources of stress were not the result of the physical aspects of injuries. Rather, psychological reactions (e.g., fear of injury, feeling that hopes and dreams were shattered, watching others get to perform) and social concerns (e.g., lack of attention, isolation, negative relationships) were mentioned more often as stressors. Being familiar with these stress sources is important for track & field coaches working with injured athletes. Teaching stress management techniques not only may help athletes perform more effectively but also may reduce their risk of injury and illness. In a well-designed clinical trials study, collegiate athletes who were randomly assigned to stress management training versus control condition experienced fewer days lost to injury or illness across a season (Perna, Antoni, Baum, Gordon, & Schneiderman, 2003).

KIRBY LEE PHOTO

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRESS AND INJURY

from family, friends, and coaches; coping skills; and the number of days athletes could not participate in their sport because of injury (Smith, Smoll & Ptacek, 1990). Life stress was associated with athletic injures in the specific subgroup of athletes who had both low levels of social support and low coping skills. These results suggest that when an athlete possessing few coping skills and little social support experiences major life changes, he or she is at a greater risk of injury. Similarly, athletes

Understanding why athletes who experience high stress in life are more prone to injury can significantly help track & field coaches in designing effective programs to deal with stress reactions and injury prevention. Two major theories have been advanced to explain the stress-injury relationship. Attentional Disruption. One promising view is that stress disrupts an athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attention by reducing the peripheral attention (Williams, Tonyman & Andersen, 1991). Thus, a long-distance runner under great stress may not see a moving vehicle or misguided throwing implement and is struck. When his stress levels are lower, the runner has a wider field of peripheral attention and is able to see the object in time to avoid being struck and subsequent injury. It has also been suggested that increased state anxiety causes distraction and irrelevant thoughts. For instance, a cross country runner who practices after an argument with a peer might be inattentive to the running path and step into a hole, twisting her ankle. Increased Muscle Tension. High stress can be accompanied by considerable muscle tension that interferes with normal coordination and increases the chance of injury (Smith et al., 2000). For example, a highly stressed pole vaulter might experience more muscle tension than is desirable and fall from an elevated height, injuring himself. Increased stress may also lead to generalized fatigue, muscle inefficiency, reduced flexibility and

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

P S YC H O LO G I C A L FAC TO R S C O N T R I BU T I N G TO I N J U RY

motor coordination problems (Williams & Andersen, 2007). Track & field coaches who work with an athlete experiencing major life changes (e.g., a high school student whose parents are in the midst of a divorce or a college athlete going through a bad breakup) should watch the athlete’s behavior closely. If she shows signs of increased muscle tension or abnormal attentional difficulties when performing, it would be wise to ease training and initiate stress management strategies.

Coaches must recognize antecedent conditions, especially major life stressors, in athletes who have poor coping skills and little social support. When high levels of stress are identified, stress management procedures should be implemented and training regimens adjusted. Athletes must learn to distinguish between the normal discomfort of training and the pain of injury. They should also understand that a “no pain, no gain” attitude can predispose them to injury.

OTHER PSYCHOLOGICALLY BASED EXPLANATIONS FOR INJURY In addition to stress, sport psychologist working with injured athletes have identified certain attitudes that predispose players to injury. Rotella and Heyman (1986) observed that attitudes held by some coaches—such as “act tough and always give 110 percent” or “if you’re injured, you’re worthless”—can increase the probability of athlete injury. Act Tough and Give 110 percent. Slogans such as “Go hard or go home,” “No pain, no gain,” and “Go for the burn” typify the 110-percent-effort orientation that many coaches promote. By rewarding such effort without also emphasizing the need to recognize and accept injuries, track & field coaches encourage their athletes to compete hurt or take undue risks. A hurdler, for instance, may be repeatedly rewarded for competing through hip pain on a given race. He becomes even more daring, competing in further events or practices until one day he sustains a serious, insurmountable injury. This is not to say that athletes should not throw the shot put hard or extend themselves in the long jump. But giving 110 percent should not be emphasized so much that athletes take undue risks—such as performing in extreme pain and increasing their chances of severe injuries. Effective track & field training does involve discomfort, but athletes must be taught to distinguish the normal discomfort accompanying overload and increased training volume from the pain accompanying the onset of injuries. If You’re Injured, You’re Worthless. Some athletes learn to feel worthless if they are hurt, an attitude that develops in several ways. Track & field coaches may convey, consciously or otherwise, that winning is more important than the athlete’s wellbeing. When an athlete is hurt, they no longer contribute toward winning. Thus, the coach has no use for the athlete— and the athlete quickly picks up on this. Athletes want to feel worthy (like winners), so they practice or compete while hurt and sustain even worse injuries. A less direct way of conveying this attitude that injury means worthlessness is to say the “correct” thing (e.g., “Tell me when you’re hurting! Your health is more important than winning”) but then act very differently when an athlete is hurt. The athlete is ignored, which tells him that to be hurt is to be less worthy. Athletes quickly adopt that attitude that they should perform even when they are hurt.

CONCLUSION Psychological factors influence the incidence of injury, response to injury, and injury recovery. Professionals in our field must be prepared to initiate coaching practices that help prevent injuries, assist in the process of coping with injury, and provide supportive psychological environments to facilitate injury recovery. Psychological factors, including stress and certain attitudes, can predispose track & field athletes to injuries. 22

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

REFERENCES Andersen, M.B., & Williams, J.M. (1988). A model of stress and athletic injury: Prediction and prevention. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10, 297-306. Ford, I.W., Eklund, R.C., & Gordan, S. (2000). An examination of psychosocial variables moderating the relationship between life stress and injury time-loss among athletes of a high standard. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18(5), 301-312. Marti, B., Vader, J. P., Minder, C. E., & Abelin, T. (1988). On the epidemiology of running injuries. The 1984 bern grand-prix study. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 16, 285-294. Petri, T.A., & Perna, F. (2004). Psychology of injury: Theory, research and practice. In T. Morris & J. Summers (Eds.), Sport psychology: Theory, application and issues (2nd ed., pp. 547571), Milton, Australia: Wiley. Perna, F.M., Antoni, M.H., Baum, A., Gordon, P., & Schneiderman, N. (2003). Cognitive behavioral stress management effects of injury and illness among competitive athletes: A randomized clinical trial. Annuals of Behavioral medicine, 25(1), 66-73. Podlog, L., & Eklund, R.C. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of competitive athletes return to sport following injury. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 18, 44-68. Rotella, R.J., & Heyman, S.R. (1986). Stress, injury and the psychological rehabilitation of athletes. In J.M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance (pp. 343-364). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield. Smith, R.E., Ptacek, J.T., & Patterson, E. (2000). Moderator effects of cognitive and somatic trait anxiety on the relation between life stress and physical injuries. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 13, 269-288. Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., & Schutz, R.W. (1990). Measurement and correlates of sport-specific cognitive and somatic trait anxiety: The Sport Anxiety Scale. Anxiety Research, 2, 263-280. Williams, J.M., & Andersen, M.B. (2007). Psychosocial antecedents of sport injury and interventions for risk reduction. In G. Tennebaum & R.C. Edklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 379-403). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Williams, J.M., Tonyman, P., & Andersen, M.B. (1991). The effects of stressors and coping resources on anxiety and peripheral narrowing. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 3, 126-141. Dr. Matthew Buns is a faculty member in Concordia’s Health and Human Performance Department. His teaching emphasis is in physical education and exercise psychology and his research interests focus on motor development, curriculum and school wellness policy.

STRENGTHTRAINING BEYOND BARBELLS AND DUMBBELLS BY JOHN M. CISSIK

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

KIRBY LEE PHOTO FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

STRENGTH TRAINING

ver the last 10-15 years, a number of new training tools have exploded on the scene for the strength and conditioning of athletes. Many of these tools have poor science supporting them, questionable application to track & field and are being driven by sensationalism. This article will describe several of these tools, the current state of the research on their effectiveness and will discuss what role these tools may have in the strength and conditioning of track & field athletes. This article will cover the following strength and conditioning tools:

Bands and chains Postactivation potentiation Kettlebells Suspension training Ropes Core training BANDS AND CHAINS Bands refer to what are essentially giant rubber bands that fit around each end of the barbell. Chains are links of chains that are wrapped around each end of the barbell. Both tools are meant to attack weak points of a lift. These are primarily used on the bench press and the back squat, but can be used on other exercises as well. Free weight exercises have several interesting qualities that bands and chains help to take advantage of. First, you can generally lower a lot more weight than you can lift. Second, there are points in each lift where the lift becomes more difficult as you move through its range of motion. For example, when rising from the bottom position of the back squat, the sticking point isn’t coming out of parallel, but tends to be at about 40-60 degrees of knee flexion. Bands can be attached to the floor or from a height. When they are attached to the floor they become stretched out as the barbell is lifted up. The further up the barbell is lifted, the more tension the bands begin exerting, which makes it more difficult to complete the lift. Then, when the barbell is lowered, the band attempts to shorten quickly so it becomes more difficult to lower the barbell under control. When bands are attached to a height, it becomes difficult to lower the weight because the bands are stretching out as the barbell is lowered. Thus the bands help an athlete to enhance different aspects of the lift. Chains are wrapped around each end of the barbell and hang down towards the floor. As the barbell is lowered, the chain links accumulate on the floor, reducing the weight of the barbell. As the barbell is lifted, the links are lifted off the floor, gradually increasing the weight of the barbell. Again, chains are used to attack specific parts of the lift. Are bands and chains effective? Anecdotally yes, these are widely used in the training of competitive powerlifters and have made their way into many university weight rooms. There is little research on their effectiveness, however. Studies have found that bands are more effective at increasing bench press and squat strength than normal loading (Anderson et al 2008; Bellar et al 2010), though research on chains has not yet found this (McCurdy et al 2009). Bands and chains are meant to attack weaknesses on specif26

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

ic lifts. Bands may cost between $10 and $30 each depending upon the length and tension; chains may cost between $100 and $200 depending upon the weight of the chains. These are meant to be advanced tools to make an individual stronger on those lifts. A track & field coach needs to keep this in perspective; adding weight to the squat or bench press at all costs may not transfer to improved performance in an athlete’s event. If these are used in an athlete’s training, they should be used by advanced athletes who have already begun to plateau from traditional methods and should be incorporated as part of a larger, carefully thought-out program. This kind of training fits best into special preparation and pre-competition phases of training when the focus is on increasing maximal strength.

POSTACTIVATION POTENTIATION: Postactivation potentiation (PAP) is an old concept that has had a resurgence in recent years. The idea behind PAP is to combine a heavy strength training exercise with an explosive plyometrics movement. The heavy strength training movement will cue the athlete’s nervous system enhancing their performance on the explosive movement. Old school coaches will recognize this by the term “complexes.” Research on PAP is mixed. Some research looking at athletes finds that it is effective at enhancing power output (Baker 2003; Kilduff et al 2008) while some studies looking at untrained individuals find that it is not effective (Hrysomallis and Kidgell 2001). Other studies find an enhancement in force production but not translating to an increase in athletic performance (Kilduff et al 2011), and still other studies looking at athletes suggest that PAP only works with very specific kinds of movement (Moir et al 2011). If PAP exists, it’s very likely that it only applies to very specific types of activities and not to others. Now, it needs to be pointed out that training for PAP does not reduce power; in other words, it may not be a magic bullet, but it doesn’t seem to hurt performance. This point is important because combining heavy strength training with plyometrics is an approach that many coaches advocate for in-season training because it saves training time (i.e. more work can be done in a shorter amount of time).

KETTLEBELLS Kettlebells have become extremely popular in the last ten years. They are essentially weighted balls with a handle. Proponents of kettlebell exercises feel that they do everything from strength and power training to metabolic conditioning to aerobic conditioning. Any traditional strength training exercise can be performed with a kettlebell, including the variations of the Olympic lifts. In addition, there are a number of skilled exercises that can be performed with kettlebells requiring a great deal of balance and coordination. Despite their popularity and the anecdotal support, there is almost no research on kettlebells. Farrar et al (2010) is one of the few studies out there and they found that doing kettlebell swings for 12 minutes straight increased an athlete’s heart rate. There are a large number of DVDs, social media videos and books on kettlebells. Some of the exercise techniques that are being advocated, especially with regards to the Olympic lifts, need to be viewed with caution. For example,

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

STRENGTH TRAINING

many sources advocate simply swinging the weights around, and this can result in serious shoulder or elbow injury when used as a technique on the Olympic lifts. Kettlebells are approached as a strength exercise in that they are weighted and one is able to lift a heavier kettlebell as the exercise becomes easy, so one can become stronger or more powerful as a result of training with them. The downside with this is that just like with dumbbells, lots of these at different weight increments are needed to challenge athletes and keep them developing. Kettlebells are also expensive, averaging $1.40-$3.00/pound depending upon the size of the kettlebell. Kettlebells are also approached as an endurance exercise. For example, a popular fitness test at the major kettlebell instructor certifications is to have the candidate perform onehanded kettlebell snatches for five minutes (attempting to do 100 in that time). This endurance approach might have some application to endurance events, or might make a good warm-up for a strength and power athlete, but this is not an effective way to improve maximal strength or power. When training for strength and power, kettlebells are an obvious tool for the thrower. Other event groups can use these as general preparation training, active recovery, or for an endurance training modality.

SUSPENSION TRAINING Suspension training involves the athlete performing exer-

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

cises while part of their body is suspended in the air (for example, performing push-ups on gymnastics rings with only the feet in contact with the ground). The act of suspending the athlete in the air challenges the athlete because they must balance with only part of their body in contact with the ground. There is also a large skill component to these exercises, which means that a certain amount of time needs to be devoted to learning before the exercises can be truly effective. There is no research on the effectiveness of suspension training. This is a popular training tool in fitness clubs and in the military when, for reasons of deployment, a great deal of exercise equipment isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t available. It needs to be kept in mind that at the end of the day these are still bodyweight exercises, so the ability to enhance strength and power is very limited, especially with more experienced athletes. Suspension units can be purchased commercially for between $130 and $200 each. If used as part of a track & field athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s program, this type of training would fit best as early general preparation training or as an active recovery mode of training.

ROPES Most coaches will be familiar with the idea of jumping rope for fitness. Over the last few years, the idea of using ropes that are very thick (about 1.5 to 2 inches in diameter) as a tool for improving metabolic conditioning has sprung up. The idea is to take a 30-100 foot length of thick rope, wrap the

middle around something that won’t move, and have the athlete hold both ends of the rope. A number of exercises are then performed for time periods to achieve the desired results. For example, an athlete may assume the athletic ready position, hold the ropes in each hand, keep the arms straight, raise the ropes to shoulder level, and then flexing at the hips “slam” the ropes down at the ground and repeat for a predetermined period of time. There is no research about the effectiveness of training with ropes. It does make training a little more interesting and less monotonous and would certainly have value as warm-up for a track & field athlete. However, the coach needs to be warned that these ropes cost $100 to $200 each depending upon their thickness (though they cost a third of that at a home improvement store).

CORE TRAINING Core training has exploded in popularity over the last 20 years. The focus of core training is to train the superficial and deep muscles around the midsection and hip. In theory, training these muscles will improve posture, the ability of the athlete to transfer force through the midsection, and condition the muscles that stabilize the spine. All of these things, in theory, will enhance performance and prevent lower back injuries. This type of exercise is also used to treat lower back injuries. There are many types of core training exercises. Everything

from traditional sit-ups and crunches to exercises requiring the athlete to maintain their balance on an unstable device (like a large ball) to exercises that require the athlete to hold a position for an amount of time and focus on stabilizing the spine. Each type of exercise is effective and a great deal of research has been done over the last 20 years showing which type of exercises recruit specific muscles better. The challenge with core training is that most of the injury prevention and athletic performance improvement claims are not supported by research. In fact, research either contradicts these claims or is inconclusive. Cissik (2011) in a recent literature review could not find any evidence that core training improves athletic performance or prevents lower back injuries. Cissik also found that while exercise does help with the treatment of chronic lower back pain, any kind of exercise is effective (core training, aerobic exercise, even just stretching). Contreras and Schoenfeld (2011) in another recent review note that much of the science behind core training is built upon mathematic models of the pig’s cervical spine. Clearly there are some differences between a track & field athlete’s lower back and a pig’s cervical spine. Certainly core training has a place in a track & field program. As Cissik noted in his review, vanity is a perfectly acceptable reason to perform some of these exercises. It’s just not an acceptable reason to devote a lot of time to them. Track & field coaches are bombarded daily with new approaches to strength and conditioning. Most of these,

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

STRENGTH TRAINING while interesting, are not supported by research. Those that are often have conflicting results and limited applications. It is important for a coach to be informed so that he or she can best use their athlete’s limited training time most effectively.

REFERENCES Anderson, C.E., Sforzo, G.A. and Sigg, J.A. (2008). “The effects of combining elastic and free weight resistance on strength and power in athletes.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(2): 567-574. Baker, D. (2003). “Acute effect of alternating heavy and light resistance on power output during upper-body complex power training.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 17(3): 493-497. Bellar, D.M., Muller, M.D., Barkley, J.E., Kim, C-H., Ida, K., Ryan, E.J., Bliss, M.V. and Glickman, E.L. (2010). “The effects of combined elastic- and free-weight tension versus free-weight tension on one-repetition maximum strength in the bench press.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24. Cissik,J.M. (2011). “The role of core training in athletic performance, injury prevention, and injury treatment.” Strength & Conditioning Journal 33(1); 10-15. Contreras, B. and Schoenfeld, B. (2011). “To crunch or not to crunch: An evidence-based examination of spinal flexion exercises, their potential risks, and their applicability to program design.” Strength and Conditioning, 33(4), 8-18. Farrar, R.E., Mayhew, J.L. and Koch, A.J. (2010). “Oxygen cost of kettlebell swings.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

Research, 24(4): 1034-1036. Hrysomallis, C. and Kidgell, D. (2001). “Effect of heavy dynamic resistive exercise on acute upper-body power.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 15(4): 426-430. Kilduff, L., Cunningham, D.J., Owen, N.J., West, D.J., Bracken, R.M., and Cook, C.J. (2011). “Effect of postactivation potentiation on swimming starts in international sprint swimmers.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(9), 24182423. Kilduff, L.P., Owen, N., Bevan, H., Bennett, M., Kingsley, M.I.C. and Cunningham, D. (2008). “Influence of recovery time on post-activation potentiation in professional rugby players.” Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(8): 795-802. McCurdy, K., Langford, G., Ernest, J., Jenkerson, D. and Doscher, M. (2009). “Comparison of chain- and plate-loaded bench press training on strength, joint pain, and muscle soreness in Division II baseball players.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(1): 187-195. Moir, G.L., Mergy, D., Witmer, C.A., and Davis, S.E. (2011). “The acute effects of manipulating volume and load of back squats on countermovement vertical jump performance.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(6), 14861491. John Cissik is the director of fitness and recreation and the assessment planning coordinator at Texas Women’s University. He has published seven books and more than 60 articles on strength and conditioning.

EMORY UNIVERSITY SPORTS PHOTO

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

TEACHING TOTHE TEST EFFECTIVE ANAEROBIC TRAINING FOR DISTANCE RUNNERS

BY CARL LEIVERS

ver since Arthur Lydiard, distance coaches have focused on aerobic training. In Lydiardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s view, anaerobic training was the least important piece of training and a leading cause of burnout among athletes (Lydiard & Gilmour). Exercise physiologists over the years have reinforced Lydiardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contention that aerobic work should comprise the bulk of training for distance runners. Recent studies indicate that the aerobic energy systems contribute up to 94 percent of energy used in a 5K and up to 97 perecent of energy used in a 10K (Chapman). To be sure, no distance runner is going to run his or her best without a strong background of aerobic training. So why should a distance coach be concerned with anaerobic training, given the limited energy that the anaerobic systems contribute during a race? To answer that question, it helps to look at the points in a race when a runner will rely on the anaerobic systems. Throughout the race, both the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems are contributing energy. During most of the race, the aerobic systems provide the majority of the energy with the anaerobic systems playing a supporting role. But at specific, high-intensity points in the race, the anaerobic systems become the primary source of energy (McArdle, Katch & Katch).

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

TEACHING TO THE TEST

In a perfect world of evenly paced races and flat courses, the anaerobic systems become the primary source of energy as the intensity increases in the final stages of the race. In the real world of uneven pacing, surges, and hills, the anaerobic systems are a primary contributor of energy at various points throughout the race. In each case, the anaerobic systems are called upon at critical moments in the race. For two runners who are both well trained aerobically, the edge in a competitive situation will go to the runner whose anaerobic systems are better able to handle the strategic demands of the race. Given the principle of specificity of training (that the body adapts specifically to specific stress), the anaerobic training of a distance runner will be most effective when it mimics the conditions under which the anaerobic system will be a primary source of energy during the race. The “traditional” form of anaerobic training — multiple repeats at significantly faster than race pace — may have a place in middle-distance training, but it does a poor job of recreating the conditions the distance runner will face.

Since the body adapts specifically to specific stress, the goal of including anaerobic work in an interval workout should be to recreate the conditions of the race as closely as possible. Instead, effective anaerobic work for a distance runner should “teach to the test” of the race and focus on intermittent anaerobic efforts incorporated within race pace work and increasing intensity in the second half of workouts. This produces a much closer recreation of the demands of the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems during the course of the race. You can mimic the conditions of the race in workouts that you already use with your team by including intermittent, high-intensity work (“hammer intervals”), by

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

designing specific workouts that mimic these conditions (“blend workouts”), and through “progressive tempo runs.” Each has their own purpose and their own place in your training program, but they all work to closely recreate the race conditions when the runner will rely on the anaerobic energy systems.

HAMMER INTERVALS In a “traditional” interval workout, the intensity increases throughout the workout. As the runner becomes more tired, it takes more effort to maintain the same pace on each repetition. This increase in intensity, however, tends to be gradual and somewhat linear due to the recovery periods between each repetition. In a race, this lack of rest creates an increase in intensity that is more exponential (Simmons & Freeman). Since the body adapts specifically to specific stress, the goal of including anaerobic work in an interval workout should be to recreate the conditions of the race as closely as possible. The introduction of what Scott Simmons, coach at Queens University and the American Distance Project, calls “hammer intervals” allows a traditional interval workout to better mimic the demands of a race. As Simmons explains, “a hammer interval is one or more interval in the second part of the workout, which corresponds to a point in the race where significant fatigue is expected.” During these hammer intervals, “the athlete increases the pace well over the anaerobic threshold.” This spike in anaerobic energy system contributions can be used to mirror the uneven energy contributions that occur in the race. And not only is the hammer interval itself significantly more difficult, but so is the following repetition thanks to the accumulated fatigue from the hammer interval. This allows the workout to increase exponentially in intensity in the second half of the workout and prepares the runner better for the mental and physical challenges of the race. Hammer intervals are also more effective than simply increasing the speed of the repetitions in the second half of a workout. Since the body reacts specifically to specific stress, it’s beneficial to keep the majority of the workout near race pace. Hammer intervals allow the intensity in the second half of the workout to increase without increasing the overall pace of the majority of the repetitions in a workout. Hammer intervals can be inserted in workouts that you already use with your team, although the placement and purpose will differ slightly depending on the type of workout you are using. For longer repetitions (800m and longer), the goal of hammer intervals is to recreate the exponential increase of intensity in the second half of the race. In

TEACHING TO THE TEST this case, one hammer interval can be sufficient. For example, if you are running a workout of 5x1600m, hammering the second 800m of the fourth mile will exponentially increase the effort of the fourth mile. By keeping the same rest, it will also increase the intensity of the fifth mile. This will allow the runner to practice the mental and physical energy that it will take to maintain pace late in a race. In workouts where you are running repetitions shorter than 800m, hammer intervals can be used to simulate the energy demands of short, high intensity bursts in a race — a hill, passing another runner, or surging to keep up with a pack. Because of this, it may be appropriate to include more than one hammer interval in a workout. For example, if you are running a workout of 16x400, having the runner

hammer the tenth and the fourteenth repetitions will recreate the surges and pace changes of the second half of the race. The exact placement of these hammer intervals is dependant on your goals and the individual runner. You can place them to correspond to specific points in a race (a steep hill at the start of the third mile), or at places where the runner traditionally struggles (the fourth mile). For the inexperienced runner, placing hammer intervals at the end of workout can be an effective introduction since the “natural” tendency is to try and run the final part of a workout harder. This will prepare the runner to push themselves when tired and lays the groundwork for introduction of hammer intervals earlier in the workout. Regardless of your goals, hammer intervals are most effective in the second half of a workout — for the same reason that increases in intensity are much harder to handle in the second half of a race. Any high-intensity periods in the first half of the race or the workout are easily handled by the runner since fatigue hasn’t begun to set in yet.

EMORY UNIVERSITY SPORTS PHOTO

BLEND WORKOUTS

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

Blend workouts incorporate similar ideas to hammer intervals but have a specific focus. Whereas hammer intervals are designed to simulate the exponential increase in intensity that happens over the course of a race, blend workouts are specifically focused on teaching your body to deal with the effects of that increase. In a race, following a period where the anaerobic energy systems are the primary energy source — hills, surges, etc. — there is accumulated lactate. Once the intensity drops and the aerobic energy systems become the primary energy source again, this lactate is cleared from the muscles. In a traditional interval workout, this clearance takes place during the rest period. However, since there are no rest periods in the race, it is important to teach your body how to clear lactate while running at race pace. As described by famed running coach Renato Canova, blend workouts consist of a “mix of [alternating] long and short intervals in order to increase the ability to remove lactate quickly” (Magness). Specifically, to increase your body’s ability to clear lactate while still running at race pace. The long repetitions (1-2 kilometers) in blend workouts are run at race pace or slightly faster as the season progresses. The

TEACHING TO THE TEST

short repetitions (200-400 meters) are run significantly faster than race pace, more in line with mile pace. These short repetitions rely on the anaerobic energy systems — much like hammer intervals do. But by following them with short rest, the long repetitions force the body to process and clear the lactate all while running at race pace. It’s important to note that blend workouts are difficult workouts that should be used sparingly and built into slowly throughout the season. Introducing your blend workouts with a very manageable short repetition (200m) and progressing the distance throughout the season will allow the athlete to learn how to deal with the effects of this burst of anaerobic energy. Early in the season it’s also important to keep the long, race pace repetitions long enough to make sure that the lactate is cleared before the start of the next short repetition. As the runner becomes more efficient at clearing lactate

Blend workouts help to increase the runner’s confidence that they can surge strategically in a race and still be able to recover and run at their original race pace afterwards. at race pace, you can begin to drop the distance of the long repetitions and increase the distance of the short repetitions. Progressing in this way forces the body to adjust to clearing more lactate in a shorter period of time. Developing this ability to process lactate at race pace is beneficial for recovering from any mid-race spikes in anaerobic energy contribution. Blend workouts help to increase the runner’s confidence that they can surge strategically in a race and still be able to recover and run at their original race pace afterwards.

PROGRESSIVE TEMPO RUNS Tempo runs have long been a staple of distance train-

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

ing. The goal is to increase the body’s ability to utilize oxygen and therefore increase the amount of work that can be done without significant accumulation of lactate (Daniels). Traditionally, tempo runs are run at a steady pace throughout to make sure that the production and the clearance of lactate are in balance. This is important to create the optimal stimulus to increase your lactate threshold. It does not, however, mimic the demands of the race, especially the second half, during which the difficulty and intensity increase dramatically. Being able to deal with accumulated lactate and increasing intensity at the end of a long, sustained effort is vital for good racing performance. Even in an evenly paced race, the runner must increase their intensity and effort to maintain a consistent pace late in the race. By changing your traditional tempo run to a “progressive tempo run,” the workout better simulates the demands of the race — particularly the critical late stages. Simmons says that, “the tempo run should be a progression that covers the whole gradient, [the] range from aerobic to pre-anaerobic to the anaerobic threshold, and indeed, it should cross over into the anaerobic realm” (Simmons & Freeman). It’s important to note that Simmons is not advocating turning your tempo runs into a time trial. Rather, the goal here is to allow the runner to practice the increasing intensity and anaerobic energy demands of the second half of the race. It’s also important to note that since you are still spending a large portion of the progressive tempo run under lactate threshold, it has similar aerobic benefits to a traditional tempo run. Those gains are not compromised by the increasing pace so long as you spend a significant percentage of the run under lactate threshold. As you increase your pace over the final portions of the tempo run, you train your body to cross over the lactate threshold. Simmons notes that “this is exactly what happens in a race.” This allows the runner to practice dealing with the increasing intensity and pain that comes along in the second half of the race. It also trains the runner to be able to mentally push themselves at the end of a long, sustained effort. These are two important gains that are not achieved in traditional tempo runs. Progressive tempo runs can be introduced in the middle of your season, after a series of traditional tempo runs have been completed. In order to most accurately simulate the demands of the race, they should approximate the distance or the amount of time of the race. Although progressive tempo runs will help the runner learn to deal with the increasing intensity of the late stages of the race, the recovery period from these workouts will be much shorter than they would be from a race since the majority of the run is at a manageable effort.

EMORY UNIVERSITY SPORTS PHOTO

CONCLUSION Distance coaches ever since Arthur Lydiard have known that the bulk of distance training should be focused on developing the aerobic energy systems. Not only do the aerobic energy systems contribute the majority of energy used during a distance race, but runners are better able to handle and benefit more from aerobic training than anaerobic training. The anaerobic energy systems contribute only a small percentage of the energy used to complete a distance race. But the anaerobic contributions come at critical moments in a race, making it an area that should not be ignored in training. It is important that anaerobic training for distance runners “teach to the test” of the race so that the maximum benefit can be gained from the limited amount of training that is being done. Anaerobic training for the distance runner should aim to mimic those moments in a race when anaerobic systems are primarily used — the increasing intensity of the second half of the race, and high intensity moments in the race such as a surge or a hill. The recreation of these moments in practice can be accomplished effectively through the inclusion of “hammer intervals,” the design of specific “blend workouts” and

the use of “progressive tempo runs.” Each can be utilized without sacrificing aerobic development and has a place in the training plan of any distance runner interested in running his or her best.

REFERENCES Chapman, R. (2011). Training for the Mile: Aerobic/Strength Approach. WISTCA Clinic, Milwaukee, WI. Daniels, J. (2005). Daniels’ Running Formula. Champaign: Human Kinetics. Lydiard, A. & Gilmour, G. (2000). Running with Lydiard. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport. Magness, S. (2011). Workouts to Improve Lactate Clearing Rates. Running Times, April 2011. Retrieved from http://runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=22359 McArdle, W., Katch, F., & Katch, V. (2006). Essentials of Exercise Physiology. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Simmons, S. & Freeman, W. (2006). Take the Lead: A Revolutionary Approach to Coaching Cross Country. USA. Carl Leivers has been an Assistant Track & Field and Cross Country Coach at Emory University since 2006.

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

USTFCCCA www.mondoworldwide.com

www.gillathletics.com

www.ucsspirit.com

www.beynonsports.com

www.advpolytech.com www.balfour.com

www.coacheschoice.com

www.brooksrunning.com

Through their ongoing support of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Associaton, these companies demonstrate their strong commitment to the sports of Track & Field and Cross Country. 42

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

SUPPORTERS www.ucsspirit.com

www.mfathletic.com

www.nasftraction.com

www.vsathletics.com www.FTTF.com

www.finishlynx.com www.maxmedals.com The USTFCCCA strongly encourages each member to purchase products and services from these supporters. FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

WATER: A RUNNING COACH’S COMPETITIVE EDGE By Alberto Salazar

hroughout my career as a distance runner and Olympic coach, I’ve heard about and sought after it. What athlete doesn’t want to unlock the key to breaking through barriers and reaching unbelievable success? The problem in the running world with developing a competitive edge, of course, is the very real risk of injury. Sprains, strains, tears and breaks can become annoying realities at best and career-enders at worst. So it’s imperative to avoid burning out bodies while reaching for ever-greater success. That’s where I’ve found it’s essential to explore other methods of cross-training that are as effective as but do not have the physical impact of miles upon miles of land-based running. In my current status as head trainer for the Oregon Project, I train world-class athletes like Galen Rupp and

Mo Farah. In their quest for medals and records, they log significant mileage each week, but it’s not their outdoor running that has enabled them to continuously shatter records (both Rupp and Farah had incredible years in 2011 on the international stage). Instead, it has really boiled down to one word: water.

H2O FOR RUNNING SUCCESS Years ago, I began investigating innovative methods for runners to blast past their personal barriers and achieve personal and team advantages legally, ethically and, most importantly, safely. My search led me to what might seem an unexpected place – the pool. I discovered that a portable, submerged underwater treadmill could be one of the most valuable pieces of equipment for coaches and runners. Thanks to the innate power of water to almost completely eliminate

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

W AT E R : A R U N N I N G C O A C H ’ S C O M P E T I T I V E E D G E the pesky gravitational forces that put undue stress on the body during training, my athletes and I have been able to increase our miles (I continue to run comfortably underwater as well despite the normal aging processes I have experienced) each day without risk of hurting ourselves. For many coaches who have clung to traditional methods of training, my embrace of the HydroWorx X80 underwater treadmill has been viewed as unorthodox. Yet my athletes’ times (including numerous personal bests and national records) prove that it’s working. Ironically, the reason it works is quite scientifically sound despite how unconventional the modality may appear. In the water, a body can be supported up to 90 percent depending upon how submerged the runner is. (I’d estimate my runners are submerged to a depth that offsets about 6070 percent of their body weight.) This makes it possible for them to safely run in the water even if they are sore or recovering from land-based running injuries. There is very little stress on them; in fact, Rupp, a distance runner who competes in the 5,000 and 10,000 meters, has often commented that after a run in the pool, he feels “rejuvenated”. He’s also mentioned on numerous occasions that the HydroWorx, which he’s used since he was in high school, is one of the biggest reasons he’s had so much success. Make no mistake, though; the underwater treadmill workouts I have developed are no walk in the park. Our worldclass level athletes log up to 25-33 percent of their weekly mileage in the pool. In a year’s time, that’s equated to many of them missing zero days of training. Even if they couldn’t run on land, they were able to run in the water. They’ve stayed on-track and motivated, even if they weren’t at 100 percent. In short, it’s been a coach’s dream come true from the perspective of not having to wait to continue training.

THE SCIENCE BEHIND WATER Tests that have been conducted on muscular functioning show underwater treadmill running mimics closely that of running in a non-aquatic environment. These case studies have repeatedly revealed that water-based workouts need not be considered an “alternative” to running outside, but as a complementary (and, in my opinion, exceedingly important) training method. In one study conducted at the University of Idaho, 23 recreationally competitive runners performed runs on both land-based and underwater treadmills. Their cardio respiratory rates, perceived exertion and blood lactate levels were measured after each run. The results showed that, on a HydroWorx, the participants’ peak cardio respiratory responses were comparable to those they experienced from running on land. Interestingly, in the same University of Idaho study, the runners’ heart rates decreased during the underwater treadmill sessions due to an increase in central venous return, preload and stroke volume as a result from a shift in blood volume due to the hydrostatic pressure of the surrounding water. The study’s authors, W. Matthew Silvers, Erin R. Rutledge and Dennis G. Dolny, concluded that underwater treadmill was a viable alternative to maintain or improve fit-

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

ness levels in individuals who were injured or healthy. In another case study also from the University of Idaho, 15 track & field athletes completed nine 5-minute submaximal underwater treadmill workouts. Their results showed that limb loading was reduced compared to land-based running. But the energy expenditure per stride ranged from 30-56 percent greater during underwater running than it was during running in a land environment. Consequently, runners can get arm and shoulder workouts during their underwater treadmill runs, a fantastic (and resourceful) way to crosstrain them without having to add extra workouts in the gym. Finally, researchers at Texas A&M University discovered after doing a 12-week exercise study on 47 men and women that lean body mass (primarily in the legs) increased during underwater treadmill exercise over land-based running. Clearly, the underwater running trend is more than a flash in the pan; it’s a proven way to get athletes to that next level as effectively and efficiently as a coach possibly can.

TRAINING WITH H2O For a coach, it’s important to have a plan for athletes using the underwater treadmill. I do not simply ask my runners to take a run on the HydroWorx without having some kind of thoughtfully developed comprehensive system in place. I actively participate with them from either the side of the pool or in the water (another advantage to them running in one spot) in order to gain the most we can from each training run. A solid way to start each training regimen on the underwater treadmill is to gauge the athlete’s running mechanics. When an individual is running underwater, the tendency is for the person to allow the pressure of the water to influence where his or her arms are placed during running. As a result, the force of the water causes the arms to go back farther than they should be for optimum results. Therefore, a coach must ensure that runners’ arms are pushing against the water, mimicking the ideal arm movements for land-based running. I typically watch for the hands of the runner to “break” the water; if I don’t see this, I have them adjust their strides and hand/arm movements accordingly. This accomplishes two goals immediately: 1) the athlete is in the correct upper body position for optimum running; and 2) upper body and core strength is increased thanks to the resistance of the water. The lower body must also be positioned correctly during underwater running. Periodically, I use an external video device with the HydroWorx unit to show my runner’s foot strike. (The device is connected to the X80 via cables and broadcasts the lower extremity onto a television or computer monitor.) Ideally, I want to see the foot coming down in a straight line from the hips to the knees to the feet. If that line is incorrect, I have the athlete immediately make an adjustment. Again, this forces the runner to focus upon biomechanics which in turn helps him or her when he or she next runs on land. When the biomechanics are acceptable, we typically move on to more in-depth, personalized programming. Though each program I develop for athletes is unique to

their levels and goals, it’s typically 20-60 minutes per day, four to five times a week. During a session, I have them vary their speeds and incorporate the HydroWorx’s powerful jets that push back against the runner. This makes them work at a higher intensity, as if a strong gust of wind were resisting their forward movements. Ironically, because they are running underwater, they do not feel the exhaustion afterwards as they might if their bodies were jolted and jarred by land-based runs in extremely windy conditions.

RECOVERING WITH UNDERWATER RUNNING Saving the legs from injury is always the goal for a coach, but it’s sometimes thwarted by unforeseen problems. So when an athlete starts to become sore or has experienced a physical setback, I put them in the water as soon as they are cleared by our medical team. The underwater treadmill is revolutionary in its ability to help athletes heal both physically and, quite frankly, psychologically. (It can be tough for an elite athlete to be told to “take a break.”) In fact, in the majority of cases where the injury is related to overtraining, it only takes a week of running on the HydroWorx exclusively to get one of my athletes back to their land-based training. My formula is pretty straightforward: When any of my athletes are sore, I put them on the HydroWorx immediately so we waste no time. My medical backup is supportive as long as the injuries are not severe. If the runners aren’t hurting on

the HydroWorx (and I’ve found that approximately 90 percent of injuries don’t hurt in the water), they can continue their training. It’s this kind of ability to “nip in the bud” potential pitfalls that adds even more value to my team in terms of having the underwater treadmill at our disposal. Finally, I would be remiss if I didn’t note that all my athletes love the massage tool that comes standard on the X80. They can give themselves a quick massage with a jet hose. It’s deep and penetrating, loosening their muscles and assisting their bodies in releasing built-up lactic acid. In the end, they tell me repeatedly they leave their HydroWorx workouts feeling better … despite the fact that they logged intensely-run miles!

WATER: MORE MILES, LESS RISK The health of the runners is at the core of any running program; thus, it should be at the top of coaches’ concerns at all times. Over the years, I’ve found that water offers more miles, less risk and great rewards. Is an underwater treadmill an advantage for both shortand long-distance runners and their teams? Absolutely. And when the competitive edge is the name of the game, it’s a critical way to keep runners focused, unhurt and motivated. Alberto Salazar is a three-time New York City Marathon winner, Boston Marathon winner, American track record holder (5,000 meters and 10,000 meters) and Olympic Marathon Team member who currently coaches elite runners for the Nike Oregon Project.

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

2011 USTFCCCA NATIONAL CROSS COUNTRY COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION I

Mick Byrne Wisconsin Men’s COY

Lawi Lalang Arizona Men’s AOY

Sheila Reid Villanova Women’s AOY

Chris Miltenberg Georgetown Women’s COY

DIVISION II

Ryan Haebe Western State Men’s AOY

Jenifer Michel Western State Men’s COY

Neely Spence Shippensburg Women’s AOY

Tracy Hellman Augustana Women’s COY

DIVISION III

Ben Sarthe St. Thomas Men’s AOY

Al Carius North Central Men’s COY

Chiara Del Piccolo Williams Women’s AOY

Jeff Stiles Washington Women’s COY FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DIVISION I 2011 USTFCCCA REGIONAL CROSS COUNTRY COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR GREAT LAKES REGION

Callum Hawkins Butler Men’s AOY

Mick Byrne Wisconsin Men’s COY

Danielle Tauro Michigan Women’s AOY

Mike McGuire Michigan Women’s COY

Donn Cabral Princeton Men’s AOY

Patrick Henner Georgetown Men’s COY

Sheila Reid Villanova Women’s AOY

Gina Procaccio Villanova Women’s COY

Hassan Mead Minnesota Men’s AOY

Dave Smith Oklahoma State Men’s COY

Aliphine Tuliamuk Wichita State Women’s AOY

Corey Ihmels Iowa State Women’s COY

Miles Batty BYU Men’s AOY

Ed Eyestone BYU Men’s COY

Risper Kimaiyo UTEP Women’s AOY

Joe Franklin New Mexico Women’s COY

MID ATLANTIC REGION

MIDWEST REGION

MOUNTAIN REGION

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

NORTHEAST REGION

Leonard Korir Iona Men’s AOY

Chris Fox Syracuse Men’s COY Women’s COY

Abbey D’Agostino Dartmouth Women’s AOY

SOUTH REGION

David Forrester Florida State Men’s AOY

Bob Braman Florida State Men’s COY

Amanda Winslow Florida State Women’s AOY

Steve Keith Vanderbilt Women’s COY

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION

Henry Lelei Texas A&M Men’s AOY

John Hayes Texas Men’s COY

Silje Fjortoft SMU Women’s AOY

Lance Harter Arkansas Women’s COY

SOUTHEAST REGION

Ryan Hill NC State Men’s AOY

Rollie Geiger NC State Men’s COY

Kendra Schaaf North Carolina Women’s AOY

Jason Vigilante Virginia Women’s COY

WEST REGION

Lawi Lalang Arizona Men’s AOY

Mark Conover Cal Poly Men’s COY

Jordan Hasay Oregon Women’s AOY

Greg Metcalf Washington Women’s COY FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DIVISION II 2011 USTFCCCA REGIONAL CROSS COUNT ATLANTIC REGION

Alex Monroe Lock Haven Men’s AOY

Doug Watts Edinboro Men’s COY

Neely Spence Shippensburg Women’s AOY

Steve Spence Shippensburg Women’s COY

Gabriel Proctor Western State Men’s AOY

Damon Martin Adams State Men’s COY

Lauren Kleppin Western State Women’s AOY

Jennifer Michel Western State Women’s COY

Glarius Rop American International Men’s AOY

Gary Gardner UMass Lowell Men’s COY

Jeptui Cherutich American International Women’s AOY

Karen Boen Stonehill Women’s COY

Anthony Witt Grand Valley State Men’s AOY

Jerry Baltes Grand Valley State Men’s COY

Amanda Putt Hillsdale Women’s AOY

Rod Cowan Saginaw Valley State Women’s COY

CENTRAL REGION

EAST REGION

MIDWEST REGION

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

TRY COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION II SOUTH REGION

Moses Kirui Florida Tech Men’s AOY

David Cain Alabama-Huntsville Men’s COY

Heather Nicolosi Tampa Women’s AOY

Jarrett Slaven Tampa Women’s COY

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION

Laban Sialo Central Missouri Men’s AOY

Mike Harney Eastern New Mexico Men’s COY

Chloe Susset Abilene Christian Women’s AOY

Koby Styles Midwestern State Women’s COY

SOUTHEAST REGION

Pardon Ndhlovu UNC Pembroke Men’s AOY

Scott Simmons Queens Men’s COY

Kate Griewisch Lenoir-Rhyne Women’s AOY

Tommy Barksdale Montevallo Women’s COY

WEST REGION

Micah Chelimo Alaska Anchorage Men’s AOY

Michael Freiss Alaska Anchorage Men’s COY Women’s COY

Ruth Keino Alaska Anchorage Women’s AOY

FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

DIVISION III 2011 USTFCCCA REGIONAL CROSS COUNTRY ATLANTIC REGION

Lee Berube SUNY Geneseo Men’s AOY

John Newman St. Lawrence Men’s COY

Stefanie Braun Plattsburgh State Women’s AOY

Mike Howard St. Lawrence Women’s COY

Ben Sathre St. Thomas Men’s AOY

Ted Bulling Nebraska Wesleyan Men’s COY

Linda Keller U of Minnesota Morris Women’s AOY

Steve Johnson Wartburg Women’s COY

Kevin McCarthy Wabash Men’s AOY

Brian Cashdollar Manchester Men’s COY

Alison Steinbrunner Ohio Northern Women’s AOY

Brian Diemer Calvin Women’s COY

Bobby Over Allegheny Men’s AOY

Tom Donnelly Haverford Men’s COY

Taylor Ludman Dickinson Women’s AOY

Bobby Van Allen Johns Hopkins Women’s COY

CENTRAL REGION

GREAT LAKES REGION

MIDEAST REGION

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

Y COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION III MIDWEST REGION

Matthew Perez North Central Men’s AOY

Al Carius North Central Men’s COY

Christy Cazzola UW-Oshkosh Women’s AOY

Jeff Stiles Washington Women’s COY

NEW ENGLAND REGION

Michael Schmidt Middlebury Men’s AOY

Nicole Wilkerson Middlebury Men’s COY Women’s COY

Chiara Del Piccolo Williams Women’s AOY

SOUTH/SOUTHEAST REGION

John Kieffer Centre Men’s AOY

Doug Thomasey Lynchburg Men’s COY

Sophia Stone Mary Baldwin Women’s AOY

John Curtin Emory Women’s COY

WEST REGION

Jackson Brainerd Colorado College Men’s AOY

Robert Bartlett Occidental Men’s COY

Annie Lydens Pomona-Pitzer Women’s AOY

John Goldhammer Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Women’s COY FEBRUARY 2012

techniques

Updates from the NCA A Eligibility Center BY JOHN PFEFFENBERGER

the link for the list of NCAA courses.

OKAY, SO I’M A JUNIOR NOW. NOW WHAT? We recommend that you register online with the NCAA Eligibility Center at the beginning of your junior year at www.eligibilitycenter.org. You will also need to register to take the ACT, SAT or both. If you use the NCAA Eligibility Center code “9999” as a score recipient, your score will be sent directly to the Eligibility Center, at no additional charge. You should also talk with your high school counselor to have your official transcripts sent to the NCAA Eligibility Center after your junior year is over. If you have attended more than one high school, we will need official transcripts from all of the high schools that you’ve attended. Remember, we do not accept faxed transcripts or test scores. Finally, it is important to remember that prior to registering for classes for your senior year, to check with your high school counselor to determine the amount of core courses that you need to complete your senior year in order to be NCAA eligible.

I’M A SENIOR NOW AND THE DREAM OF PLAYING NCAA DIVISION I OR II SPORTS IS BECOMING A REALITY. WHAT DO I NEED TO DO?

ith the annual rush to process initial eligibility for the upcoming fall class of NCAA student-athletes just around the corner, I thought it might be an excellent time to provide some important reminders to all high school cross country and track & field student-athletes on how they can ensure the seamless processing of their initial-eligibility by the NCAA Eligibility Center.

WHAT IS THE NCAA ELIGIBILITY CENTER? The NCAA Eligibility Center was created by the NCAA to open in the fall of 2007 and certify the academic and amateur credentials of all NCAA Division I and II prospective studentathletes. You may have formerly known us as the NCAA Clearinghouse, but since fall of 2007 we have been the NCAA Eligibility Center.

IF I’M A FRESHMAN OR SOPHOMORE AND WANT TO PLAY NCAA DIVISION I OR II SPORTS, WHAT DO I NEED TO DO? The most important thing to remember if you are a freshmen or sophomore, and you have dreams of participating in Division I or II athletics, is to start planning early! It is essential that you take classes that match your high school’s list of NCAA courses. The NCAA Eligibility Center will only use approved core courses to certify your initial eligibility. You can find a list of these courses for your high school on www.eligibilitycenter.org. Once at the site, click the NCAA CollegeBound Student-Athlete link to enter and then navigate to the “Resources” tab and select “U.S. Students” where you will find 56

techniques F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 2

If need be, take the ACT/SAT again. We will use the best scores from each section of the ACT or SAT to determine your best cumulative overall score. You should also focus on taking college-prep coursework. Just like when you were a freshman, sophomore and junior, it is important that you continue to take courses that match your school’s list of NCAA courses. Again, you can find this list at www.eligibilitycenter.org and by clicking on the NCAA College Bound Student-Athlete link to enter and then navigate to the “Resources” tab and select “U.S. Students.” It’s at this time as well that you will need to reevaluate your amateurism or sports participation responses on the NCAA Eligibility Center website. Make sure that all of your information is up to date and accurate. If you are enrolling in the upcoming fall, you must login to your account on April 1st or after of the same year you plan to enroll and request “Final Amateurism Certification.” This request locks your sports participation responses and by clicking this link, you verify that all of the information that you have provided is complete and accurate to the best of your knowledge. Work your hardest to graduate on time (in eight academic semesters) and after graduation, ask your high school counselor to send a copy of your final transcript to the NCAA Eligibility Center with your proof of graduation.

DID THIS INFORMATION HELP? Are you a coach? Are you a future student-athlete? Are you a current NCAA coach? I want to hear from you. Have an idea for a future article? What information do you want to hear more about? Let me know by emailing me at jpfeffenberger@ncaa.org.