Techniques February 2017

Page 1

contents

Volume 10 Number 3 / February 2017

in every issue

4 A Letter from the President 5 USTFCCCA Presidents

8

FEATURES 8 Over It

Variables that affect take off

Stephan Munz

18 Rotational vs. Glide Revisited

Comparing shot techniques

Andreas V. Maheras, Ph.D.

34 Going the Distance

Tearing down the 1500 meters

Scott Christensen

40 Talk Your Way to the Top

Developing the mental skill of performance enhancing self-talk

Derek R. Marr, Ph.D.

46 Sprint-Interval Cycling Training

34

The effect of tabata protocol on collegiate level distance running

Brandon Chapoton

52 Meet Director

Planning and management

Austin Brobst, M.S., and Leo Settle, M.S.

AWARDS

62 National Coaches and Athletes of the Year

COVER

Photograph courtesy of Kirby Lee

46

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

1

A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT

A

s your new president, I would like to wish all members of our USTFCCCA family a very Happy New Year. In accepting the role of president, my primary goal is to evaluate our sports at all levels and to work with officers and the national office staff to improve and move forward our membership’s agendas. We must be proactive in controlling our future within the current governing body structures. As our 2017 Indoor Track and Field seasons have begun, bringing much excitement and attention to our sport, I would like to follow up on the 2016 national convention in Orlando. With over 1,600 coaches in attendance, this year’s convention featured the largest attendance to date. Many of us remember when there was no convention, only a meeting of a small room barely full of coaches who could only dream about a convention like we experienced in Orlando. To all who took part in planning and organizing the 2016 USTFCCCA convention, our membership says THANK YOU! I hope each of you that attended made a visit to our sponsor booths and expressed how much we appreciate the support they provide to our organization. We shout out to all our members who presented a fantastic slate of symposiums. Thanks also to Boo Schexnayder who each year organizes tremendous learning opportunities to our membership. A key for our continued sports popularity and entertainment value, we must continue to improve our knowledge which in turn produces a better end product. This year’s Hall of Fame class was awesome as in the past. Their plight to success reminded us of the challenges and persistence required to be successful in not only developing great athletes but contributing citizens as well. As I say, “If it were easy everyone could do it.” Congrats 2016 Hall of Fame class! I want to thank the Hall of Fame committee for the selections of this very deserving recognition as I know your job is not an easy one. Thanks also go out to the divisional officers who take time throughout the year to lead their divisional meetings and run meetings during the convention. It goes without saying, special thanks to the National office staff for your efforts throughout the year and executing a great convention. Most importantly, thanks to our CEO Sam Seemes for his leadership and putting together this year’s convention. As always, another greatly anticipated Bowerman Award was presented. We would like to thank our emcee, John Anderson, for another entertaining evening. Congrats to all the great athletes nominated and to our 2016 award winners, Courtney Okolo of the University of Texas and Jarrion Lawson representing the University of Arkansas. We all appreciate the work our Bowerman Award’s committee does throughout the year to select the greatest of the greats for the Indoor and Outdoor Track and Field seasons. As we move forward to another great year and 2017 convention, I encourage all members to participate in all aspects to improve our presence in collegiate athletics. During this convention, we put into place steps to improve transparency regarding proposed actions that may be taken by our organization. I encourage all members to frequently visit the USTCCCA website for news and information updates. This is our most effective way to share information with our membership. Pay close attention to emails you receive from our national office and your governing organization and committees. Lastly, good luck during 2017 and I hope our members have a healthy and rewarding year!

DENNIS SHAVER President, USTFCCCA Dennis Shaver is the head men’s and women’s track and field coach at Louisiana State University. Dennis can be reached at shaver@lsu.edu

4

techniques february 2017

Publisher Sam Seemes Executive Editor Mike Corn Contributing Editor Kristina Taylor DIRECTOR OF MEDIA, BROADCASTING AND ANALYTICS Tom Lewis Membership Services Kristina Taylor communications assistant

Tyler Mayforth Photographer Kirby Lee Editorial Board Tommy Badon, Todd

Lane, Boo Schexnayder, Derek Yush

Published by Renaissance Publishing LLC 110 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Suite 123, Metairie, LA 70005 (504) 828-1380 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 2016. 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.

DIVISION PRESIDENTs DIVISION I Connie Price-Smith

Dave Smith

Connie Price-Smith is the head men’s and women’s track and field coach at the University of Mississippi. Connie can be reached at cmprice@olemiss.edu

Dave Smith is the director of track and field and cross country at Oklahoma State University. Dave can be reached at dave.smith@okstate.edu

Ryan Dall

Jim Vahrenkamp

Ryan Dall is the head track and field and cross country coach at Texas A&M Kingsville. Ryan can be reached at ryan.dall@tamuk.edu

Jim Vahrenkamp is the Director of cross country and track & field at Queens University. Jim can be reached at vahrenkampj@queens.edu

Jason Maus

Dara Ford

NCAA Division 1 Track & Field

NCAA Division I Cross Country

DIVISION II NCAA Division II Track and Field

NCAA Division II Cross Country

DIVISION III Jason is the head cross country and track and field coach at Ohio Northern University and can be reached at j-maus@onu.edu

Dara is the head cross country and track and field coach at Otterbein University and can be reached at DFord@Otterbein.edu

Mike McDowell

Heike McNeil

Mike McDowell is the head men’s and women’s track and field coach at Olivet Nazarene University. Mike can be reached at mmcdowel@olivet.edu

Heike McNiel is the head track and field and cross county coach at Northwest Christian University. Heike Can be reached at hmcneil@nwcu.edu

Ted Schmitz

Don Cox

Ted Schmitz is the head track and field coach at Cloud County Community College. Ted can be reached at tschmitz@cloud.edu

Don Cox is the head track and field and cross country coach at Cuyahoga Community College. Don can be reached at donald.cox@tri-c.edu

NAIA NAIA Track & Field

NAIA Cross Country

njcaa NJCAA Track and Field

NJCAA Cross Country

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

5

Editor’s note There was an editing error in the last issue of Techniques in the “On The Physics� article (pages 50-55). A corrected version of the second paragraph of Section 4 and a portion of Section 6 of that article is below. We regret the error.

The text in the second paragraph of Section 4 should read: “The lead angle of the attachment point relative to the weight is designated đ?›źđ?›ź in Fig. 1. The caption to Fig. 1 briefly explains how the pulling of the lash with a lead angle 0°< đ?›źđ?›ź <180° creates an acceleration force tangential to the orbit of the weight.â€?

In Section “6. THE RATE OF THE HAMMER SPEED RISEâ€?, the equation and all the symbols marked red below were missing in the published text. I don’t see any other way to communicate these corrections to the reader than to give the correct version of the three paragraphs shown below: The speed increases gradually in the winds and turns, according to the equation đ?‘‰đ?‘‰! = đ?‘‰đ?‘‰! ∙

!

1 + ����!  ,

where đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  is the final speed, đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  is the speed developed upon the entry into the first turn, đ?›żđ?›żđ?‘‰đ?‘‰! = (đ?‘‰đ?‘‰! − đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!!!  )/đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!!! is the fractional speed increase in the turn i, and the symbol ! means a product of several multipliers, marked by the running index i. We determine a turn as a period between two consecutive “neutralâ€? positions of the thrower (consecutive lowest positions of the hammer) and, besides the turns, we include in the list of the multipliers the speed increase in the final effort, i.e. the effort of the thrower to “liftâ€? the hammer from the moment of its last lowest point to the moment of release. It can be shown that the relative speed increase in any turn has a theoretical upper limit: đ?›żđ?›żđ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  ≲ 0.3. In reality, the best throwers are close to this limit, but only in their first turn. In subsequent turns, đ?›żđ?›żđ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  steeply drops and may only increase again in the final effort. For example, in the 86m 74cm record throw by Yuri Sedykh the value of đ?›żđ?›żđ?‘‰đ?‘‰! in the three turns and the final effort were, respectively, 0.25, 0.08, 0.04, and 0.10. The drop of đ?›żđ?›żđ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  is explained by the worsening of the conditions for the hammer acceleration from turn to turn, because of the steeply increasing centrifugal force acting on the hammer. The above equation demonstrates the importance of developing the maximum possible hammer speed on the entry into the first turn, because đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  is not simply added to the speeds developed in the subsequent turns but it is the basis, the seed factor, for the speed growth. Thus, the rule is: the initial speed đ?‘‰đ?‘‰!  should be as high as the thrower can develop without compromising the technique of the subsequent phases of the throw. The best throwers reach about 2/3 of the final hammer speed on the entry into the first turn. Â

6

techniques february 2017

Â

Over It

variables that affect take off Stephan Munz

8

techniques february 2017

kirby lee photo

T

he run-through, an abrupt cessation of motion during the take-off phase, results in the inability of a vaulter to finish the jump. Depending on the degree of the problem, the run-through can affect a vaulter’s development for several weeks, months or, in severe cases, it can end the vaulter’s career. The first article of this two article series shed light on the underlying psychological principles of running-through. It was the goal of the first article to provide a holistic framework of psychological variables (see Figure 1) that practitioners and coaches can use as an orientation to identify possible problems of runningthrough behavior. The second article of this series presents practical strategies and applications for coaches and athletes to prevent and fight against running-through.

A holistic model of the run-through The first article presented a holistic representation of developmental, psychological, physical and situational variables based on the work of the German researchers Nolting and Paulus (1999), as well as Bender (2011). The three influencing components showed possible impacts on the internal, cognitive and emotional processes of athletes. For instance, the framework shows how developmental processes in the form of negative experiences can have an impact on a pole vaulter’s perceptions of anxiety, self-efficacy, action control and volition. The framework also points out that physical dispositions (technical skills, coordination, speed and strength) as well as situational conditions (task at hand, environmental conditions, or current fatigue levels of the vaulter) can have an active impact on current internal thought processes, which can ultimately lead to possible action (no run-through) or state (run-through) orientations. (see Figure 1) As mentioned in the previous article, this framework should serve coaches, practitioners and athletes as a compass to detect possible causes of running-through behavior. The framework should serve as an overview to evaluate running-through so that coaches can draw the right conclusions and intervene with appropriate strategies if runningthrough occurs. The following section provides possible practical strategies coaches and athletes can use to prevent or fight against occurring phases of running-through.

Strategies and Principles Identify the problem. If running-through occurs, it is important to identify the type of the problem first. Runningthrough is much easier to solve when the type of problem is identified, as the cause leads to selecting the right solution. To achieve this, it is essential that an active and open communication loop between the coach and the athlete exists. Coaches must foster a trusting relationship with their athletes so that their athletes feel comfortable discussing problems, feelings and personal concerns. When it comes to mental or psychological problems, athletes are often times concerned about showing weakness and are not willing to talk openly to their coaches about the problem. Therefore, it is key that behaviors, emotions and thoughts are mutually and causally interdependent between the coach and the athlete (Huber, 2013).

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

9

over it

Figure 1: Interaction-theoretical model of factors that influence the run-through. Adapted from Handlungskontrolle und Angst im Stabhochsprung (p.166), by Ralf Bender, 2011, Aachen, Meyer & Meyer Verlag.

Make sure the problem is not technical in nature. Before coaches become concerned about mental or psychological aspects of the run-through they must be sure that the running-through problem is not technical in nature. First, coaches must check whether the approach rhythm is homogenous and consistent. Checking the midmark (6 steps before the take off) can help to guide and control the approach rhythm. Video analysis of the entire approach can also help to analyze whether the vaulter engages in a controlled run. Coaches should control the biomechanics of the run (body posture, stride length, knee lift, recovery), as well as the carrying technique of the pole. Most importantly, an accurate internalization and execution of the three-step plant motion and a correct take-off on the entire foot must be implemented. Possible scenario. Based on personal experience, running-through often times 10

techniques february 2017

occurs when vaulters utilize a bigger pole in practice or competition. Vaulters may run through although it seems that they hit the correct spot at the take-off mark. It can be the case that they change their approach rhythm due to the rationalization that they believe it is necessary to run harder and faster with the bigger pole. The vaulter starts his approach faster and less controlled, which can result in either a shorter stride length due to an increased cadence or an increased stride length due to a more explosive push-off at the beginning of the approach. Consequently, vaulters are too far away or too close at the mid mark and they have to prolong or shorten the last steps to hit the takeoff mark. Longer steps at the end lead to a decrease in speed and a lower body posture. This makes it difficult to “attack� the last three steps and to engage in a proper plant and take-off motion. If the vaulter increases the stride lengths due

to a harder push-off at the beginning of the run it is likely that the vaulter ends up being too close at the take-off. As a result, the vaulter loses the correct sight picture and feeling for the approach/plant and runs through.

Problems Based on Conditioned Past Traumas Respondent or classical conditioning is an involuntary and unconscious process for learning physiological and emotional responses such as fear or anxiety that can negatively affect the execution of movements (Huber, 2013). I believe that in the pole vault, the cause of the problem is often times the conditioning process of a negative stimulus such as an accident or a pole break. The vaulter pairs a neutral stimulus such as a pole, the pit or the pole vault movement with the negative stimulus of the accident. The presentation of the neutral stimulus elicits fear and anxi-

over it ety. In my experience, vaulters often times report that they want to perform but simply can’t get their body to do it. Coaches can use the following strategies to initiate a deconditioning process. Confront past trauma. If an accident or pole break occurs, it is likely that athletes will tend to suppress these traumatic experiences. Oftentimes, they ignore them as if they have never happened. However, these experiences can lead to an unconscious conditioning process that will result in fear and anxiety. It is essential for athletes to have an open discussion about these past experiences. Athletes should confront past traumas and put them into perspective as an objective reality. They will recognize how these experiences contributed to their debilitating physiological response and current problem. For example, it can help if athletes talk or even watch a video of a jump where they missed the pit. The release of negative emotions and feelings can be assuaging and the athletes can put the past trauma into perspective. The athletes can become aware of their skills and competence again (Huber, 2013). An injury or trauma history report can also help to reveal underlying emotional events from the past that could trigger blocks and performance anxiety. In their book “This is your Brain on Sports,” David Grand and Alan Goldberg (2011) point out the importance of these reports. The reports uncover the roots of the problems based on every trauma and injury that the athletes have experienced in the past. Even minor injuries that are unconsciously stored in the athlete’s nervous system can affect the execution of motions. History reports can help to understand the problem and individualize further treatments (Grand & Goldberg, 2011). In severe cases traumas require professional interventions. Use cognitive restructuring. Cognitive restructuring is the process of reflecting about thoughts and emotions that result from the consequences of a negative experience. While thinking and reflecting about the emotional responses, the athlete attempts to change negative thoughts or false beliefs. For instance, there is no reason for vaulters to believe that they cannot successfully jump anymore after one missed jump or crash. Vaulters must be encouraged to establish an objective perspective and point of view (“I have had thousands of successful jumps and 12

techniques february 2017

this one missed jump will not change anything”). It can also help vaulters to create a list of why they should be able to successfully execute the jump. It must be clear that there are many more reasons for a vaulter to have successful jumps than there are for not taking-off. Furthermore, it can also be a good strategy for the coach and the vaulter to create a plan of attack: a counteroffensive of how to beat running-through. The coach and athlete establish rules, guidelines, strategies, as well as short- and long-term goals of how they can overcome running-through. The coach must have an open ear and be amenable to the strategies and ideas of the vaulter to fulfill his or her needs (Huber, 2013). Use self-talk. Using positive self-talk can help to change thoughts, emotions and physiological responses (Conroy & Metzler, 2004). It can help to recapture optimism, which in turn can create positive emotions and a more relaxed body state. Particularly right before the vaulter starts the approach, positive self-talk can help to protect the intention of taking-off from disturbing variables (Huber, 2013). Short, powerful and positive statements should be used. This can also be a motto or battle cry that can be developed in meetings with the coach. Mottos, lyrics or battle cries from movies, songs, or other sport stars who have had to overcome obstacles or difficult situations can be helpful. In addition to positive emotions, selftalk can also create a healthy relationship to counteract negative emotions that a vaulter experiences. The athlete should be aware of the fact that negative thoughts or anxiety often times serve as a natural defense system of the body (Some movement patterns of the pole vault go against the safety needs of the human body). Therefore, it is important that athletes accept them and perceive them as something natural. This relationship and perception of negative emotions can help a vaulter to be more relaxed when perceptions of anxiety or nervousness appear (Weinberg & Gould, 2011). Use muscle relaxation to release stress and anxiety. Based on personal experience, vaulters’ muscles tighten up due to anxiety or stress before they begin their approach. This increased muscle tension can lead to uneconomical contraction and relaxation phases of the muscle system, a decrease

in performance and a reduced body perception. This, in addition to feelings of anxiety and stress, can worsen the runthrough behavior and the performance of the vaulter. Progressive muscle relaxation can help to relax the muscular system and release stress. If vaulters are tensing up before a competition or vault session, they can use the following techniques to relax. The following program is based on Edmund Jacobson’s progressive relaxation technique (1938). It is a keystone for modern relaxation procedures. Getting ready. The vaulter should find a quiet, comfortable place to sit. She closes her eyes and lets her body go loose. The vaulter takes about five diaphragmatic deep and slow breaths before he or she begins. Breathing through the chest triggers left brain domination and activation which increases muscle tension and should therefore be avoided. Diaphragmatic breathing increases the amount of oxygen taken into the blood stream and enhances right brain activity, which can be beneficial for the execution of motor behavior (Garfield, 1984). Tense: The vaulter applies muscle tension to a specific part of the body. The vaulter focuses on the muscle group that is tensing up. She takes a slow, deep breath and contracts the muscles as hard as possible for about five seconds. Other muscle groups should remain relaxed. Relaxing the tense muscles: After about five seconds, the vaulter quickly relaxes the contracted muscle. The tightness will flow out of the tensed muscle. The vaulter exhales as he engages in this step. It is important to feel the difference between the tension of the contraction and the relaxation. The vaulter remains in this relaxed state for about 15 seconds. He or she can repeat the cycle for the same muscle or move on to the next muscle group (AnxietyBC, 2014). The exercise should be applied the day or several hours before the competition if muscle tension occurs. In their book “Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology” Robert Weinberg and Daniel Gould (2011) offer further instructions and guidelines of how progressive muscle relaxation techniques can be implemented. Use mental imagery with gradual stimulus presentation. If a vaulter suffers from running-through and feels anxiety before the jump, mental imagery can help to relax and reduce anxiety. A gradual

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

13

over it

stimulus presentation is key. Gradual stimulus presentation is the bit-by-bit introduction of the conditioned stimulus. The process starts with the vaulter imagining and thinking about a simple jagodin (taking off without finishing the swing) from a short approach. Vaulters repeat the jump over and over again in their mind from the first and third person perspective. If vaulters are able to imagine the jump in their minds from a short approach without feeling stressed or anxious they can go on and add other components to the imagination (longer approach, swing, etc.). They can also mentally simulate the use of a bigger pole in different competition or practice situations. Furthermore, imagery can also serve as training activity to facilitate the learning process of tech14

techniques february 2017

nical skills. It can be implemented before or after vaulting sessions, video sessions, or at the end of recovery sessions such as yoga or stability circuits. Garfield (1984) provides a nice introduction of how mental rehearsal and imagery can be implemented in daily practice sessions. After the vaulter has regained confidence with mental imagery, gradual stimulus presentation should also be applied during the actual execution of the motion. If severe running-through behavior is prevalent, it makes sense to introduce or relearn the jump and pole vault movement in different environments first. Introduce playful exercises with the pole in different scenarios and environments other than the pole vault pit. Under water pole vault, jumping from

boxes with the pole, simulating the pole vault movement on a rope and jumping into a sand pit with a pole can help the vaulter to re-experience the vault in a safe and non-competitive environment. The conditioned stimuli must be presented in a joyful and playful way without pressure or feelings of anxiety. The principle of generalization can help the vaulter to relearn the pole vault movement. Generalization occurs when a previously learned response is transferred to a different, but somewhat similar situation. In other words, if a new stimulus from a new exercise is presented, the individuals can react to it as if it was the old stimulus that they already encountered (Huber, 2013). For example, if vaulters can execute the takeoff movement to catch a rope and execute the swing, they already feel more confident and familiar with the situation if they have to do the same movement with a pole. This principle can be extremely helpful to build one exercise on another after severe running-through periods. During this transfer process of exercises the vaulter must also experience fun and a relaxed atmosphere. Short games and challenges can also be introduced. The pole vault experience should be joyful again. Once this experience has been re-developed, the athlete can return to the pit and begin to vault again. Slowly increase the complexity of pole vault specific exercises at the pit. Develop the pole vault as a step-by-step process based on exercises that do not overload the athlete. A vaulter can regain confidence at the pit again by executing basic exercises over and over again without feelings of anxiety or stress. This means that after severe phases of running-through, one has to start from scratch again. Straight pole work from two, three or four steps can be a good starting point. It is important to add one component at a time. Furthermore, time and patience are the most important factors. Often times the vaulter jumps from a longer approach too soon. This can lead to a new phase of running-through due to the fact that the execution of the movement is not stable and automated enough. The vaulter cannot protect the execution if other unexpected variables come into play. As a result, these basic drills must be a part of every practice for a long period of time. If running-through occurs again, the vaulter has to simplify the exercise and regain confidence and comfort from easier exercises from a shorter approach with a smaller pole. To support that step, it is essential that the coach eliminates as many extraneous variables as possible. Eliminate extraneous and disturbing variables. If a vaulter suffers from running-through, it is kirby lee photo

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

15

over it important that the coach oversees and regulates the extraneous and situational variables during practice and re-training. Breaking down feedback. It is essential that coaches provide only a limited amount of information at a time. Coaches should not overload the athlete with tips and explanations. As discussed in the previous section, the athlete needs a great amount of cognitive capacity to protect the intention of the movement. The coach should not provide extensive detailed information at once. In phases of running-through, the athlete should only focus on one aspect at a time. In her book “Attention and Motor Skill Learning” Wulf (2007) supports this thesis by pointing out that reducing the complexity of feedback can also enhance motor learning processes. Wulf (2007) also shows that directing attention to movement effects (desired outcome of movement) results in superior performance than focusing on the actual coordination of the body movements. Technical training: During phases of running-through, focus on technical improvements as opposed to attempting to jump high. Use smaller poles and shorter approaches. It is about gaining confidence back and developing a rhythm and automaticity. This can be accomplished more easily if the athlete is not at the limit in terms of grip, pole size and approach length. Weather. Wind, rain and temperature can influence and affect the vaulter’s performance and confidence. Although, it is very important for every vaulter to jump under difficult conditions to gain more experience and toughness, a vaulter who is going through a run-through phase should avoid this additional stress. If possible, vaulters should jump inside for a couple of sessions so that they only have to focus on the pure execution of the movement, instead of having to make additional adaptations to extraneous variables. Individual practice sessions. During running-through phases, it can be helpful if the coach implements individual practice sessions with the athlete. Athletes can better focus on their individual problem without worrying about disturbing noises and actions. The coach can implement a more professional atmosphere where vaulters can completely focus and concentrate on their actions and behaviors. In addition to that, the coach should make sure that other disturbing variables such as music or other noises are eliminated 16

techniques february 2017

as well. Less is more. Make sure that the athlete does not take too many jumps. If vaulters become tired and fatigued, it is much more likely that they are going to run through again at the end of practice. This can destroy a productive period of not running-through and they lose confidence. Furthermore, it is important that athletes are physically fit and fresh. It can be helpful to implement a rest day before the vault practice so that athletes are physically and mentally well rested before they jump.

Limitations and Conclusions Ultimately, creating a holistic model of the variables that influence and affect the runthrough is extremely difficult due to the complexity of the problem. The pole vault is a physically and psychologically challenging event where many factors and variables can come into play. This article primarily focused on the psychological factors that can play a role in running-through. It must be made clear that there are other underlying theories and variables that, by necessity, were excluded in this article. For instance, theories about motor learning and motor control behavior can give additional insight in terms of the execution and control of movements. Studies about eyehand coordination or the estimation of distances could provide further explanations of run-through behavior. Furthermore, biomechanical analyses of the approach, plant and take-off may also describe why certain vaulters are more likely to runthrough, due to a less effective execution of specific movements. Many of the presented strategies and guidelines focus on the scenario of a vaulter who suffers from conditioned past traumas. It may be possible to build on these ideas through specific principles and lessons of how a coach could foster the self-efficacy of a vaulter in specific situations. Furthermore, additional strategies of how the volitional control can be enhanced could also be beneficial for some vaulters with running-through problems. Further studies about attention control and concentration processes that can protect the intention from disturbing variables are likely the most relevant. In regards to anxiety, the principles and guidelines could also be extended to include somatic anxiety reduction techniques, cognitive anxiety reduction techniques, and multimodal anxiety reduction

techniques (Weinberg & Gould, 2011). As a final result one can say that the developed model in Figure 1 shows some of the first steps of how different variables and factors can influence the behavior of a pole vaulter. This model can serve as a map to coaches where they can locate the origin of their athlete’s problem if running-through occurs. Correctly identifying the problem will result in more appropriate interventions and solution processes.

References AnxietyBC, How to do progressive muscle relaxation . (2014, January 1). Retrieved May 1, 2016, from http://www.anxietybc.com/ sites/default/files/MuscleRelaxation.pdf Bender, R. (2011). Handlungskontrolle und Angst im Stabhochsprung. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer Verlag. Conroy, D.E., & Metzler, J.N. (2004). Patterns of self-talk associated with different forms of competitive anxiety. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26, 69-89. Garfield, C., & Bennett, H. (1984). Peak performance: Mental training techniques of the world’s greatest athletes. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher Grand, D., & Goldberg, A.S. (2011). This is your brain on sports: Beating blocks, slumps and performance anxiety for good! Indianapolis: Dog Ear Publishing. Huber, J. (2013). Applying Educational Psychology in Coaching Athletes. Champaign: Human Kinteics. Jacobson, E. (1938). Progressive relaxation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Nolting, H., & Paulus, P. (1999). Psychologie lernen . Weinheim : Beltz . Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2011). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Champaign : Human Kinetics. Wulf, G. (2007). Attention and motor skill learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Stephan Munz is a Ph.D., candidate in Educational Psychology at Virginia Tech. As a student, Stephan focuses his research on theories of motivation both in the classroom and how they affect peak performance environments in coaching and athletics. Stephan received his undergraduate degree in sports science and biomechanics from the University of Stuttgart (Germany) and his master’s in Educational Psychology at Virginia Tech where he was also a member of the pole vault team. Stephan currently serves as a volunteer assistant coach in the pole vault.

18

techniques february 2017

Andreas maheras photo

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited comparing shot techniques Andreas V. Maheras, Ph.D.

A

lthough the rotational style appeared almost sixty years ago, it started establishing itself as a legitimate way of putting the shot in the early 70’s when national and world records were set employing this technique. The two most prominent proponents of the early era of the rotational style were Brian Oldfield of the U.S. and Alexandr Baryshnikov of what used to be the Soviet Union. It is currently the dominant style of throwing among American male shot-putters while it is rapidly gaining ground across both sexes in both domestic and international shot-putters. Albeit its increasing popularity, the rotational style of putting the shot has not completely dominated the technique of that event. Some coaches and athletes may be proficient and favor one style over the other while others may be apt towards either style. In this narrative, an overview of the various aspects of those two techniques is presented in a comparative fashion in an effort to elucidate some known similarities and differences between the two.

Shot Velocity In both the rotational and the glide techniques the velocity of the shot varies during the course of the throw. Initially there is an increase, followed by a decrease culminating in a final and dramatic increase at release (Ariel et al., 2004). In the glide, the shot reaches velocities between 2.0 and 4.0 m/sec., in the early stages of the throw decreasing slightly to 1.5 to 3.5 m/sec., when the back leg touches down in preparation for the power position. Following a small increase during the transition to the front leg in the power position, there is a dramatic increase of the shot velocity as it attains its maximum speed at release which is usually no less than 13m/sec., in high caliber throws. In the rotational technique, the shot velocity during the preparation for the transition from double to single support over the front foot in the back of the circle was reported close to 4.0 m/sec., in Lanka (2000). Coh & Stuhec (2005) reported a maximum velocity of 3.5 m/ sec during the same phase. Generally, higher maximum value velocities are observed in FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

19

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited

Figure 1. Graphic representation of the summation of the start (Vs) and final (Vf) velocities in the glide shot putting. Note, a) the different direction of the start velocity, and b) the differences in the magnitude of the resultant velocity. (From Lanka, 2000).

rotational shot putting up to the moment when the back foot lands in the middle of the circle (Susanka & Stepanek, 1988). At that moment, the shot velocity was reported at 1.38 m/sec. in Coh & Stuhec (2005) and no higher than 1.2 m/sec., in Stepanek (1990) for the rotational style. For the glide style, this value was about 1 m/sec., more as reported in Susanka & Stepanek (1988). Therefore, the velocity of the shot, at the moment the back foot lands in the circle to initiate the final double support, a decisive moment in shot putting, is quite higher in the glide as compared to the rotational style of throw20

techniques february 2017

ing the shot. The significant drop in the velocity of the shot in rotational shot putting is due to the fact that in the airborne phase, the shot moves opposite to the direction of the throw, and also due to the presence of centripetal forces (particularly if a large loop forms) which at that particular moment resist the movement of the shot horizontally.

Horizontal Plane Path There has been an ongoing discussion as to the optimum shape of the path of the shot during the glide technique, as it advances from the back of the circle to its

point of release. In this style, a curved path is observed. Due to the position of the shot in the start of the glide, the quantities of the velocities during the glide itself and that during the delivery phase, point in different directions (see Figure 1). This results in an inability to sum up all the velocities developed during the various phases of the throw no matter what method is used to lessen that effect. For example, if the velocity of the shot is around 2 m/sec., at back foot landing in the middle of the circle, and assuming that a shot putter can put the shot around 20 meters without gliding, which requires a release speed around 13 m/sec., then a total velocity of around 15 m/sec., would result in throws in excess of 24 meters, something that would not be the case if the same thrower were to actually glide and throw. It seems that with the rotational style, the issue of better aligning the initial and final velocity directions can be better resolved and make it possible to increase the path of force application during the final effort (Lanka, 2000). For this to occur, the shot will move at the end of a large radius (make a loop) during the rotation in the middle. Assuming that the angular velocity is the same as in a smaller or no loop condition, this will result in higher linear velocity of the shot. Also, a larger loop will increase the load on the muscles, in the form of additional resistance, so that a higher level of strength may be necessary (Tutevich, in Lanka, 2000). Similarly, too large of a loop may decrease the velocity of the extension of the throwing arm. The shot can indeed be moved on a large or a small loop, or the athlete can move around the shot (see Figure 2). In throws with a larger loop, maintaining the direction of the shot may be problematic as it happens when the shot lands out of the sector to the right, due to great centripetal forces. Regarding the importance of the tangential velocity (i.e., the linear speed of something moving along a circular path), during the second single support, Gutierrez-Davila et al. (2009), mentioned that their results confirmed that this is a critical point in the course of a rotational

Figure 2. Path of the shot with (left) and without a loop (right). Instance (1), take off from front foot in the back of the circle, (2), landing of the back foot, (3), landing of front foot for the power position, (4), release. (From Bartonietz, 1994a).

shot put, but they could not confirm that the tangential velocity of the shot at the moment of the second single support is related to the release tangential velocity of the shot or whether it is actually problematic to keep the shot in the proper direction.

Total Acceleration Path vs. Delivery Path The lengthening of the acceleration path has been a common argument for the rotational shot technique. Bosen (1985) reported the length of implement trajectory to be around 2.4 meters for the glide technique and 4.8 meters for the rotational. Because of the emphasis placed on a greater path of acceleration, Hay (1993), throwers in both techniques should lower the torso in the initial stages of the throw so the shot is outside the confines of the ring in an apparent effort to lengthen the horizontal and vertical displacements of the shot. Bartonietz (1994b), however, suggested that although indisputably the shot covers a longer overall path during the rotational technique, the path that matters is what he termed the “delivery” path which is not longer in the rotational as opposed to the glide technique. Analyzing two top throwers of the time he found that the glide thrower had a 12% longer “final” path. Stepanek (1987), reported a 0.3 meter longer delivery path for a glider compared to a rotational, when he compared two junior throwers. The relationship though between the velocity of the shot and the distance over which force is applied on the shot during

the final drive and effort, needs to be better appreciated from a mathematical perspective also. That is, we can generally say that the greater the distance of the acceleration path, the higher the final velocity. However, the underlying assumption for this to be true is that this occurs only when acceleration is constant. This probably is not the case in shot putting and the other throwing events. In those cases, the thrower utilizes a time of acceleration that is related to their individual capacity to apply force which is usually the result of the thrower’s particular technique and anthropometric characteristics. Gutierrez et al. (2009), reached the conclusion that, to the extent that the distance of the acceleration is reduced, up to certain minimum values, the force applied to the shot increases. This fact is based on the Hochmuth’s theories on the optimum distance of acceleration for the high jump (as reported in Gutierrez, 2009) and those developed by Perrine & Edgerton (1978), on the individual capacity of the muscles to develop force. Obviously the reason for the claims pertaining to the relative importance of the final path as opposed to the total path, are twofold. First, as mentioned above, the velocity of the shot drops significantly during both styles and more dramatically in the rotational style, at the back foot landing in the middle of the circle. In addition, accelerative forces cannot be applied on the implement during the flight phase which precedes the delivery phase. World class shot putters employ longer delivery paths which are between 1.6 and 1.8 meters.

Moreover, differences between the two techniques as far as the distance between the point of release of the shot and the stop board should be taken into account. This because both the acceleration path itself can potentially become longer and also the shot is released further to the front of the circle in relation to the point of distance measurement. Bosen (1985) illustrated a greater distance between the stop board and the point of release for the rotational technique in the order of 0.3 meters. Kerssenbrock (1974) reported a distance of 0.4 vs 0.1 meters for the rotational and the glide styles respectively.

The Second Single Support As the back foot lands in the circle to establish the second single support, the torso should be comparatively more erect in rotational throwers than for gliders (Oesterreich, 1997). With a position like this, the goal will be for the athlete to be able to rotate easier due to the shorter radius of rotation such a position allows. However, as the torso becomes taller, there is a shortening of the trajectory along which the shot can be accelerated during the final effort. In turn, however, this position, compared to that during the glide technique, can lead to a greater shoulder-hip separation and greater knee flexion (both good criteria for efficient shot putting) at the moment the back foot lands on the ground for the second single support. Another effect mentioned by Jarver (1976) is that the shoulder axis of rotational shot-putters slows down more in relation to the hip axis, leading to a more torqued power position. Moreover, regarding the implement velocity at the second single support, although rotational shot-putters experience lower velocities, they also experience greater shoulder axis to hip axis torsion while at the same time the shot’s position is located at greater lateral distance from the direction of the throw (Lindsay, 1994), leading to an increase of the angular trajectory of the shot during the delivery phase. From a physiological point of view, the observed increase in the torsion angle between shoulders and hips, also creates a beneficial pre-tension of the torso musculature. FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

21

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited

Figure 3. Schematic representation of the differences between the two techniques during the front foot landing by the stop board (a), and at release (b).

The Transition to the Front Foot The time between the landing of the back foot on the ground for the second single support, and the landing of the front foot in the front of the circle expresses the transition phase. During this phase there is a deceleration of the shot in rotational shot putting which reaches the level of about 1 m/sec., according to Coh & Stuhec, (2005). On the other hand gliders to not experience such a loss in the shot’s velocity at this particular phase. According to Lindsay (1994) and McCoy et. al (1984), at least part of the reason for the shot’s deceleration during the transition phase, can be attributed to longer transition times when employing the rotational technique which can be twice as long as those of the gliders. Short transition times are linked to longer throws in the rotational technique (Young, 2006) and the glide technique alike. It may be that shorter transition times may actually enhance a greater shoulder to hip axis torsion. According to Goss-Sampson & Chapman (2003), longer transition times, smaller maximal shoulder-hip torsion during the transition phase and smaller shoulder-hip torsion at the end of the transition phase were linked to shorter throws. Along the same lines, Heger (1974) suggested that shorter transition times minimize the shot’s deceleration before the final double support. He also implied that longer transition times was one of the rotational technique’s disadvantages.

Second Double Support For the majority of the athletes, there is 22

techniques february 2017

a significant difference between those employing the rotational and the glide techniques. Those who throw rotationally use a shorter base (distance between the feet) compared to those who glide (Bartonietz, 1994a; Bosen, 1985), in the order of 0.2 to 0.5 meters. This seems to be a disadvantage, due to the increased chances for fouling during the final effort. Bosen (1985) assigned a net benefit to the rotational technique with its narrow stance, commenting that longer contact is maintained beyond the stop board so that the delivery path varies between 1.7 and 1.8 meters as compared to between 1.5 and 1.6 meters during the glide. Another potential mechanical beneficial element of the narrow stance has to do with the creation of a double leg lift for the final effort. Lindsay (1994) reported that the shoulder to hip torsion achieved by rotational shot putters during the second single support, is lost by the time the front foot touches down for the second double support. Apart from being a disadvantage, however, this could indicate that rotational shot putters are accelerating the shot more efficiently during the transition phase by “untorquing” their shoulder to hip torsion angle before the front foot touches the ground in the front of the circle. This effect was coined as the rotational pre-acceleration by Oesterreich at al., (1997), who speculated that it was one of the main advantages of the rotational technique.

Final Effort The role of both legs during the final effort is of paramount importance in both styles of shot putting in the sense

that they are very active and contribute significantly to a successful completion of the throw. However, their actions could be quite different between the two styles. In the glide technique, the majority of the body weight is initially over the back leg before there is a transfer over the front leg. In the rotational technique, throwers often push simultaneously with both legs with minimal weight transfer from back to front (Figure 3). Heger (1974) commented that such an execution is not as effective as that of the glide, while others (Oesterreich at al. 1997), made the argument that according their rotational pre-acceleration theory (also see above), the shot putter while still in the second single support over the back leg, is able to begin rotational acceleration and successfully continue it through the release of the shot, thus enabling the thrower to more efficiently accelerate the shot in the final effort. The same authors suggested that to maximize the distance thrown, rotational shot putters should actually attempt to jump upwards for the delivery of the shot. This way, vertical acceleration is generated by the activity of the legs with horizontal acceleration being the result of the arm strike and the horizontal component of the rotational acceleration. Regarding the vertical jump, Bartonietz & Borgstom (1995), mentioned that the position for the final effort should be such so the thrower will be able to place the shot directly over the right thigh, pelvis and shoulder so that there is an efficient and most direct application of force to be transmitted on the shot itself. Gutierrez-Davila et al. (2009), and Luhtanen et al. (1997) found that the great acceleration observed in both styles of shot putting during the delivery effort, was achieved by the rotational shot putters right after the landing of the front foot to complete the power position (Figure 4). On the other hand, the gliders exhibited a definite acceleration of the shot a bit later following the left foot

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

23

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited

Figure 4. The force acting on the shot in the course of the throw following left foot landing in the power position, to release. Glide technique left, rotational technique right. Top graphs, (Ft) is the tangential component (changes in velocity), (Fc) is the centripetal component (changes in direction). (P) is the maximum power in kW, or 8.3 and 9.0 HP for the glide and the rotational technique respectively. Bottom graphs, (Fres) is the resultant force. (From Lanka, 2000).

landing (Gutierrez-Davila et al. (2009). Among the women gliders they analyzed, only two of the eight, were able to demonstrate a clear acceleration at front foot landing. The authors though noted that although their data showed that it may be easier to accelerate the shot during the final delivery of the shot with the rotational technique, their results do not necessarily show that the delay in the definitive acceleration observed in the glide technique is due to only one factor. Other factors related to the velocity of the body segments and the body positions themselves, are factors that cause the differences found in the final acceleration of the shot.

Shot Release During the completion of the delivery phase, assuming that the lower extremities have contributed maximally in the course of the throw, it is essential that the non throwing side provides a solid support so that the throwing side can indeed act optimally also. That support 24

techniques february 2017

of the left side is in the form of an active stop or block at least during the exact moment of release. It has been suggested that it is easier to stop the non throwing side during the glide as compared to the rotational technique, further suggesting that the thrower should attempt to essentially prevent the non-throwing side from decelerating/blocking (GossSampson & Chapman, 2003). It has also been suggested that the difficulty of effectively blocking the non throwing side is a disadvantage of the rotational technique because it prevents the active stretching of the chest area and may also cause the forward movement of the trunk to be stopped prematurely (Heger, 1974). On the other hand, there are some advantages of the rotational technique that may “make up” for such presumed shortcomings. For example, it has generally been accepted, and indeed for some is necessary, as in Oesterreich at al. (1997), that the thrower should be airborne during release if the rotational technique is used, something that it is not

exactly and clearly the case in the glide technique. Indeed, an airborne delivery is observed in the majority of high level rotational shot putters. The short base of support, the reduced weight transfer from the back leg to the front, and the coordinated two-leg push during the release phase, actually necessitates an airborne release. Bartonietz & Bogstrom (1995) and Oesterreich et al. (1997), reported that the front foot comes off the ground before the back foot in all the athletes they studied, and it also reaches a higher point above the ground. This observation may provide evidence of the thrower’s intention to “jump” upwards with a powerful action of the back leg. In the former authors’ study, there was an implication that the higher the front foot is off the ground the better the back leg action may be. Arrhenius (2014), suggested that optimally, if the shot putter can produce greater peak force into the ground with he right leg during the delivery phase, this will cause the shot putter to come off their front leg sooner, resulting in greater velocity of release. In addition, the narrow base and the two-leg push observed during the rotational technique may lead to a posture at release where the hips are more forward. This allows rotational shot putters to release the shot with the hips over the front foot thus enabling them to push and release the shot further in front of the stop board. Gliders on the other hand release the shot with the hips behind the front leg. (Kerssenbrock, 1974).

Ground Reaction Forces, Efficiency, and Energy Demands Ground reaction forces show a similar general pattern of the interaction of the feet in relation to the ground in both techniques in the phase following the second single support over the back foot, until the moment of release (Bartonietz, 1994a). Also, the data from Bartonietz (1994b) showed that rotational shot putters exhibit larger maximum ground reaction forces but directed steeper. Pagani (1985) addressed that the front leg of rotational shot putters applies up to three times as much force as the back leg and

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited this exceeds the force exhibited by the front leg of glider shot putters, suggesting the different role of the front leg between the two shot put styles. Arrhenius (2014), found that indeed both absolute peak force values and peak force values as percentage of the body weight were higher for the front leg but only 6% and 11% respectively. Peng et al. (2008), reported that the braking force of the front leg was greater than that of the back leg, the maximal vertical force of the front leg was smaller than that of the back leg, and the total impulse of vertical force of the front leg was smaller than that of the back leg. Bartonietz (1994b), reported that it is more difficult to produce early accelerating power output from the right leg in rotational shot putting, due to the longer transition times observed. His data indicated that the increase of the velocity of the center of gravity, as a result of the back leg’s push only, in rotational shot putting, reaches only one third of that of the glide’s value. However, this absolute right leg force value acting on the center of gravity should be evaluated not as just a brute force but as power, a fact that necessitates the consideration of the quantity of velocity (P= F x v). In other words, what matters is how fast the center of gravity moves when it really counts, which is during release. In that case, in the rotational technique, the velocity of the center of gravity increases as the thrower decreases the momentum of inertia and rotates faster (also in Stepanek, 1990), past the phase of the take off from the back leg. This increase can reach 0.8 m/sec. This value could probably not be obtained from the work of the right leg of a glider who can increase the velocity of the center of gravity by no more than 0.3 m/sec. (Bartonietz, 1994b). Along the same lines, the power demands of the rotation technique are about 20% higher for comparable ranges, because the path of the shot and the thrower’s body during the delivery is shorter and the velocity of the shot is lower at the start of the delivery. However, as hinted previously, the thrower using the rotational technique can create a high level of power with the help of the explosive leg thrust which in turn creates an explosive angular acceleration and a very high muscular pretension 26

techniques february 2017

(Bartonietz,1994c) Bartonietz (1994b) further reported that, a) the relative physical work to accelerate the shot is slightly higher in the rotational than the glide shot, however, there is more relative work required to lift the shot in the glide technique; b) the relative potential for increase of the shot’s velocity during the delivery phase is higher in the rotational shot, as is also the relative potential to increase the shot’s velocity from the shot’s minimum velocity; and c) the relative physical power demand to accelerate the shot during delivery is higher in the rotational shot putting, which shows that the mechanical efficiency, in attaining a given performance, is not as good as that of the glide. Rotational shot putters must perform more work for the same result, which implies that they need a higher level of power in the form of specific strength. The specific strength will lead to an improved muscular pre-tension which together with the powerful back leg extension, creating vertical lift, result in a velocity of the center of gravity which is more than double that of the gliders. Bosen (1985) addressed the efficiency of the two techniques in regards to the difference in distance between the execution of a standing throw and that of a full throw. In that respect, gliders generally expect 1.5 to 2.0 meters to be added to their standing throw as opposed to 2.75 to 3.0 meters, for their rotational counterparts. Bartonietz (1994c) also mentioned that training practice suggests a high efficiency of the rotational technique when taking into account the distance achieved by given abilities and the anthropometric data. That is, smaller and may be less strong throwers may be able to achieve better performance when employing the rotational technique. Further illustrating the overall efficiency of the rotational shot, Stepanek (1990) compared two very high caliber throwers (the current two best of all time), who had exhibited similar performances (0.08 m. difference). He reported that the glider increased the velocity of the shot in the final effort, from 2.6 to the final 14.2 m/ sec. along a delivery path of 1.99 meters, while the rotational shot putter increased the velocity from 0.5 to 14.25 m/sec., along a path of 1.75 meters. The author suggested that because of such observa-

tions the rotational technique may yield better performances. Other reasons for using the rotational technique were the enabling of achieving a better and more “natural” position of the body during the delivery phase and that it also allows for better utilization of the swing movements of the extremities.

Conclusions According to Oesterreich et al. (1997), the most prominent advantage of the rotational technique over the glide, is that it allows for more favorable conditions for the final acceleration of the athlete-shot system. As Palm (1990), suggested, the essence of the rotational acceleration of the shot cannot be determined only by simply observing the values of the shot velocity and its trajectory in the course of a throw. In that sense, although the velocity of the shot may seem very low, (as it happens in the second single support, before the final effort), the quantity of motion and kinetic energy do not decrease, they remain high, and contribute significantly towards a maximum release velocity. There is an observed rotational preacceleration of the thrower and the shot along with a highly efficient redistribution of the rotational energy between the lower extremities the torso and the throwing arm. In the rotational technique the optimal use of the inertia of the torso and the shot results in a clearly higher amount of tension in the muscles involved, and consequently to a more effective impulse buildup in the final effort phase. During the rotational technique, the shot putters may, on average, utilize shorter acceleration paths in the delivery phase, but they can compensate for this by utilizing higher angular velocity of the right side (hip) the throwing shoulder and elbow. The start of the rotation itself is generally a more natural movement than gliding backwards. However, in competition, a disadvantage of the rotational technique is that it allows for inconsistent performance. Executing a good throw using the rotational technique without fouling, is generally more challenging as compared to the glide technique. The high rotational velocity which is twice that of the glide, along with the short duration of the delivery usually require more coordination. The rotational technique is a compara-

Rotational vs. Glide Revisited tively more complex and difficult technique to perfect and is subject to flaws. Tiny imperfections can shave distance off the throw. Selection of rotational shot putters should be based on the same criteria as those for the gliders. However, shorter but more powerful throwers have a better chance for better individual performances with the rotational style. The rotational technique could also be better suited for those throwers who lack what is called “starting” strength something which is more prevalent during the static start of the glide technique. Because of the pattern of the acceleration path of the shot which is characterized by a reduction of the velocity of the shot to 1m/sec. or less, at the moment the back foot lands somewhere in the center of the circle, the power requirements for the final acceleration of the shot are higher in rotational shot putting as compared to the glide. One also needs to take into consideration that the stance during the power position is shorter than the glide, the torso is more erect at back foot landing in preparation for the power position, both contributing to a shorter acceleration path of the shot. In the case of comparable achieved distances, the assumption is that the force exerted can be 8% greater than in the glide. This power must be generated by the leg, the torso, the shoulders and the arm musculature. It can be produced by employing the driving forces of the skeletal and motor systems, that is, the rotational acceleration of the body and shot system, with the resulting buildup of tension in the final position and drive. It is at this decisive moment that the rotational technique, although a technique that requires more power and skill, may have a clear advantage over the glide technique.

References Arrhenius, N. (2014). Ground forces impact on release of rotational shot put technique. Masters thesis, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT. Ariel, G., Penny, A., Probe, J., Buijs, R., Simonsen, E., Finch, A., & Judge, L. (2004). Biomechanical analysis of the shot-put event at the 2004 Athens Olympic Games. Accessed from the public domain. Bartonietz, K. (1994a). Rotational shot put technique: Biomechanic findings and recommendations for training. Track 28

techniques february 2017

and Field Quarterly Review, 93(3), 18-29. Bartonietz, K. (1994b). The energy relationship in rotational and glide shot put techniques. Modern Athlete and Coach, 32(2), 7-10. Bartonietz, K. (1994c). Training of technique and specific power in throwing events. Modern Athlete and Coach, 32(1), 1-16. Bartonietz, K., & Borgstöm, A. (1995). The throwing events at the World Championships in Athletics 1995, Goteborg - Technique of the world’s best athletes. Part 1: shot put and hammer throw. New Studies in Athletics, 10(4), 43-63. Bosen, K.O. (1985). A comparative study between the conventional and rotational techniques of shot put. Track & Field Quarterly Review, 85(1), 7-11. Coh, M., & Stuhec, S. (2005). 3-D kinematic analysis of the rotational shot put technique. New Studies in Athletics, 20(3), 57-66. Goss-Sampson, M.A, & Chapman, M. (2003). Temporal and kinematic analysis of the rotational shot put technique. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21, 237-238. Gutierrez-Davila, M., Rojas, J., Campos, J., Gamez, J., & Encarnacion, A. (2009). Biomechanical analysis of the shot put at the 12th IAAF world indoor championships. New Studies in Athletics, 24(3), 45-61. Hay, J.G. (1993). The Biomechanics of Sports Techniques (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Heger, W. (1974). Is the rotation technique better? Track Technique, 58, 1849. Jarver, J. (1976). Discus-style shot put. Track Technique, 66, 2097-2098. Kerssenbrock, K. (1974). Potential of the rotation shot put. Track Technique, 58, 1848. Lanka, J. (2000). Shot Putting. In V. Zatsiorsky (Ed.), Biomechanics in Sport (pp. 435-457). London: Blackwell Science Ltd. Lindsay, M.R. (1994). A comparison of rotational and O’Brien shot put techniques. The Thrower, 63, 12-17. Luhtanen, P., Blomqvist, M., & Vanttinen, T. (1997). A comparison of two elite shot putters using the rotational shot put technique. New Studies in Athletics, 12(4), 25-33. McCoy, R.W., Gregor, R.J., Whiting, W.C., Rich, R.G., & Ward, P.E. (1984). Kinematic analysis of elite shot-putters.

Track Technique, 90, 2868-2871. Oesterreich, R., Bartonietz, B., & Goldmann, W. (1997). Rotational technique: A model for the long-term preparation of young athletes. New Studies in Athletics, 12(4), 35-48. Pagani, T. (1985). The “spin” shot put style. Track & Field Quarterly Review, 85(1), 15-16. Palm, V. (1990). Some biomechanical observations of the rotational shot put. Modern Athlete and Coach, 28, 15-18 Peng, H., Peng, H., & Huang, C. (2008). Ground reaction force of rotational shot put-case study. ISBS conference, July 14-18, 2008, Seoul, Korea. Pierrine, J., & Edgerton, V. (1978). Muscle-force-velocity and power-velocity relationships under isokinetic loading. Medicine in Science and Sport, 10, 149156. Stepanek, J. (1990). Kinematic analysis of glide and spin shot put technique. Biomechanics in Sports, Proceedings of the VIII international symposium on biomechanics in sports. Stepanek, J. (1987). Comparison of the glide and the rotation technique in the shot put. Paper presented at the biomechanics in sport V: Proceedings of the fifth international symposium of biomechanics in sport, Athens: Hellenic sports research institute. Susanka, P., & Stepanek, J. (1988). Biomechanical analysis of the shot put. In Scientific Report on the Second IAAF World Championships in Athletics. Rome: H1-H77. Young, M. (2009) Development and application of an optimization model for elite level shot putting. Doctoral dissertation, Baton Rouge, LA, Louisiana State University.

Dr. Andreas Maheras is the throws coach at Fort Hays State University in Kansas and is a frequent contributor to techniques.

distance

Tearing Down the 1500 Meters Scott Christensen

34 techniques NOVEMBER 2016

kirby lee photo

T

he 1500 meter race is considered one of the most exciting cornerstone events in any major track and field meet by athletes, coaches, and spectators alike. The race is characterized by a breath-taking early pace, plenty of competitive surging, a wicked critical zone, and a need to maintain bio-mechanical efficiency over every meter of the distance. Physiologists consider the 1500 meters a combined zone event and their findings suggest coaches train their athletes in a manner that maximizes concurrent development of both the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems. Over the years scientists have tried to approximate the combination of energy delivery from both metabolic systems for racing the 1500 meters and have settled on an energy contribution (for most fit people at exhaustive race pace) of 65% aerobic, 31% glycolytic anaerobic and 4% alactic anaerobic. With these percentages in mind it is hard to understate the importance of training all aspects of the energy systems in 1500 meter runners. Most distance runners are self-selected in the playground at a young age. Faster, stronger kids sprint and do related sports, while slower, less coordinated kids chose endurance related activities. When the endurance labeled kids come out for the distance team they need to shore up what they are not so good at if they are to be successful. In elite 1500 meter athletes the line between sprint type and endurance type is not so distinctive, even at a young age. Training athletes for any sport requires a planned balance of activities that stimulate development in the five areas of physical skills: coordination, flexibility, strength, speed, and endurance. Training for the 1500 meters specifically requires improvements in all five of these areas because of its unique combination of a punishing aerobic pace and a speed component at the end that rivals many sprint events. While the aerobic portion delivers more than half the energy needed for the race, it is usually the factors associated with the anaerobic portion (speed and speed endurance) where most emerging to elite 1500 meter runners need the bulk of development and attention.

NOVEMBER 2016 techniques

35

distance 1500 Runners Matt Centrowitz Robbie Andrews Ben Blankenship Leo Manzano

400 58.46 59.44 58.53 58.83

800 1:57.88 (59.42) 1:58.87 (59.43) 1:57.73 (59.20) 1:58.10 (59.27)

1200 2:54.02 (56.14) 2:54.61 (55.74) 2:53.87 (56.14) 2:54.41 (56.31)

1500 3:34.09 (40.07) 3:34.88 (40.27) 3:36.18 (42.31) 3:36.62 (42.21)

Table 1. The 400 segments/final 300 meters split performance/elapsed times for the first four finishers at the 2016 USA Olympic Trials Men’s 1500 Final.

Segment (meters)

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

M. Centrowitz

13.4 s 14.5 s 15.2 s 15.3 s 15.1 s 14.6 s 14.8 s 15.0 s 14.2 s 14.1 s 13.9 s 13.9 s 13.3 s 13.4 s 13.3 s

R. Andrews

14.0 s 14.5 s 15.4 s 15.5 s 14.9 s 14.7 s 14.5 s 15.2 s 13.9 s 14.3 s 13.6 s 14.0 s 13.5 s 13.4 s 13.4 s

B. Blankenship

13.5 s 14.5 s 15.2 s 15.3 s 14.8 s 14.6 s 14.8 s 15.0 s 14.2 s 14.1 s 14.0 s 13.9 s 13.7 s 14.2 s 14.4 s

L. Manzano

13.6 s 14.5 s 15.4 s 15.3 s 14.9 s 14.7 s 14.7 s 15.0 s 14.2 s 14.3 s 13.8 s 14.0 s 13.6 s 14.0 s 14.7 s

Table 2. The 100 meter segment times in seconds for first four finishers at the 2016 USA Olympic Trials 1500 Meter Final for Men.

Once coaches understand the demands of the 1500 meter race itself, it is necessary to profile their athletes that are interested in becoming 1500 meter runners so that a balanced training scheme can de devised to address the weaknesses of the individuals. Does a runner have a difficult time sustaining the early and middle portions of the race? Does their ability to close fast over the last 500 meters wane when tired? Do they lack foot speed? Does their form fall apart from the middle segments of the race to the end? All of these questions act as variables in understanding the progression and development of an athlete running the 1500 meters. Most coaches have a means for taking 36

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

accurate split times over segments of a 1500 meter race for their athletes. Under the demanding conditions of a race a great deal of performance data can be gleaned from these values. While the athletes may be interested in these split times as a curiosity, the real value lies in what the coach can derive from them and then use in setting up training plans or adjusting race strategy. The 2016 Olympic Trials in Eugene, Oregon featured most of the best 1500 meter runners in the United States. The field included Olympic (Leo Manzano) and World Championship (Matthew Centrowitz) medalists among others that had achieved the 2016 Olympic qualifying mark. Since the meet carried

such importance, examining the split times of the best 1500 meter runners in America under such critical conditions should reflect back on the runner’s characteristics and fitness, and the nature of the race itself. By taking a statistical look at these great runners, it could lead to conclusions that all coaches might take back to their own training group and point out “how the best do it.” In other words: This is what it takes. In the 2016 USA Olympic Trials 1500 Men’s Final, 2.53 seconds separated racers one through four at the finish. With only three Olympic Games slots available it was a competitive race to the end among four somewhat equal performers. Table 1 indicates the first three

Segment (meters) 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

M. Centrowitz 7.46 m/s 6.90 m/s 6.58 m/s 6.54 m/s 6.62 m/s 6.85 m/s 6.76 m/s 6.67 m/s 7.04 m/s 7.09 m/s 7.19 m/s 7.19 m/s 7.52 m/s 7.46 m/s 7.52 m/s

R. Andrews 7.14 m/s 6.90 m/s 6.49 m/s 6.45 m/s 6.71 m/s 6.80 m/s 6.90 m/s 6.58 m/s 7.19 m/s 7.00 m/s 7.35 m/s 7.14 m/s 7.41 m/s 7.46 m/s 7.46 m/s

B. Blankenship 7.41 m/s 6.90 m/s 6.58 m/s 6.54 m/s 6.76 m/s 6.85 m/s 6.76 m/s 6.67 m/s 7.04 m/s 7.09 m/s 7.14 m/s 7.19 m/s 7.30 m/s 7.04 m/s 6.94 m/s

L. Manzano 7.35 m/s 6.90 m/s 6.49 m/s 6.54 m/s 6.71 m/s 6.80 m/s 6.80 m/s 6.67 m/s 7.04 m/s 7.00 m/s 7.25 m/s 7.41 m/s 7.35 m/s 7.14 m/s 6.80 m/s

Table 3. Average segment speed in meters per second of the first four finishers of the 2016 USA Olympic Trials 1500 Men’s Final.

400 meter segment elapsed times and segment split times followed by the last 300 meter portion. The four individuals have variable racing styles. At first glace it appears one runner values the evenness of the early race pace, while one pushes the early to middle segments and tries to hold on, while the remaining two individuals like to close hard off a faster and faster pace. (See Table 1) Scrutinizing 400 meter split times for elite middle distance racers in high pressure situations is valuable for a macro discussion on tactics, athlete strengths and weaknesses, and future training emphasis, but zooming down to the fifteen 100 meter segment times of a 1500 meter race shows the race in a lot more detail. It will basically tell the story of how and when the race was won or lost. An array of data like Table 2 shows a comparison of the 100 meter segment times in seconds for the same four 1500 meter runners at the 2016 USA Olympic Trials 1500 Final for Men. (See Table 2) The winner of the 2016 USA Men’s Olympic Trials 1500 Meters Final was Matthew Centrowitz. During the race he ran the fastest 100 meter segment among the top four finishers at 13.3 seconds, which he ran both during

the thirteenth and fifteenth segments. Mr. Centrowitz also had the most sub 14 second 100 meter segments at six. These were his first and last five 100 meter segments. Second place finisher Robbie Andrews ran four sub 14 second 100 meter segments which were four of the last five of the race. He could not catch Mr. Centrowitz who had built a lead earlier in the race as the two virtually matched their speed over the last five segments. Third pace finisher Ben Blankenship ran three sub 14 second 100 meter segments of the race among the first four finishers. These were his first, twelfth and thirteenth segments. His first 100 meters at 13.5 seconds was the second fastest segment run during the first twelve segments of all four runners combined. It is evident Mr. Blankenship possesses the speed to run well under 14 seconds, he just could not do it when he was very tired over the last few segments of the race. Mr. Manzano finished fourth in the race and barely missed qualifying for the Olympic Games, he also ran three 100 meter segments under 14 seconds and they were the first, eleventh, and thirteenth portions. His overall fastest segment of 13.6 seconds was the slowest of the four competitors fastest efforts.

It is useful to take 100 meter segments of the 1500 meter race one step further and calculate segment speed for each of the runners in meters per second which can then be used to compare against one another in the race. This calculation and type of data set has been used for years by sprint coaches. When Usain Bolt ran his World Record 9.58 second 100 Meter World Record, people asked how he did it. Calculating meter per second values for the ten 10 meter segments of the race showed Mr. Bolt ran a top end speed of 12.20 meters per second which he held for segments six, seven and eight. Nobody had ever run so fast that deep into the 100 meters. That is how he did it. Table 3 shows the same analysis can bedone for the 1500 meters, but in 100 meter segments. (See Table 3) Each of the four runners ran faster then seven meters per second over the first 100 meters before settling into a pace in the mid six meters per second range for the next seven 100 meter segments. Each of their paces was anything but steady pace which is indicative of a racing model that may set up projected ideal 400 meter splits, but the segments within reflect the give and take of racing. After the 800 meter FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

37

distance

training schemes that are helpful in dealing with the onset and tolerance of high lactate fatigue. The first is to harden the aerobic system with frequent bouts of running at, slightly above, and considerably above lactate threshold pace. By running longer bouts of exercise at 4 mmol/L to 7 mmol/L of lactate it will prepare the racer for the rigor of the 1500 meter comfort zone before the onset of the very high lactate critical zone. The second is to train often at the high lactate values that are produced in the latter stages of the 1500 meters with frequent bouts of Special Endurance 2 exercises. The third is to get faster at 100 meters when fresh. Train like a sprinter some days. Improve sprint mechanics, coordination and flexibility so that overall speed becomes faster. Everything else being equal the faster a 1500 meter runner is over 100 meters fresh (measured in meters per second), then the greater ability to fractionalize that speed over the fifteen 100 meter segments of the race. Speed (30-60 meters on the fly) and speed endurance workouts (60-150 meters) done often are important components in training the 1500 meter runner to achieve this improvement in speed.

mark all four racers mainly settled into a pace faster then seven meters per second. Mr. Centrowitz continued to get faster and faster on each segment with only the fourteenth portion slowing just a fraction. The other three competitors tried to do the same but only Mr. Andrews was able to achieve his fastest speed of the day, outside of the first 100 meters, at the end of the race. Both Mr. Blankenship and Mr. Manzano were not able to maintain a velocity of seven meters per second over the last 100 meters with the former slow38

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

ing slightly less then the latter, but creating the illusion he was out-kicking him. The 1500 meters is a race that is completed with a considerable strain on the anaerobic glycolytic energy system. Upwards of 15 mmol/L of lactate are produced and must be tolerated over a length of time much greater than either the 400 or 800 meter events but with similar high lactate concentrations. Once lactate fatigue sets in speed begins to slow as coordinated muscle contractions are compromised. There are three key

Scott Christensen has been the Boys Cross Country and track and field coach at Stillwater High School (MN) for over 30 years. He currently heads up the Track & Field Academy’s Endurance program and serves as the program’s lead instructor. kirby lee photo

40

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

kirby lee photo

Talk Your Way to the Top Developing the Mental Skill of Performance Enhancing Self-Talk Derek R. Marr, Ph.D.

S

tudent-athletes continually engage in conversation throughout the course of their days. These conversations include telling jokes with their friends around lunch tables, discussions about their upcoming papers and exams in their academic courses, and talking about the upcoming practices with their teammates. Some of these conversations will increase their enjoyment, others are influential in a student-athlete’s life and may have an impact on their performance once the gun goes off on race day. However, there is one conversation that is the most impactful conversation that a student-athlete will ever have. This conversation is not with the coach, a parent, or a teammate. This conversation is with themselves. No, these athletes are not crazy. The internal dialog a student-athlete engages in during their performances is the most important conversation they will ever have related to their performance. “Whether you think you can or you think you can’t, you are right.” – Henry Ford

This simple yet powerful quote summarizes the impact and potential an athlete’s internal dialog can have on their performance. Henry Ford is not a track and field coach or athlete, instead he is one of the most successful individuals in history. This quote illuminates that our internal conversation, our thoughts, can support, motivate, and instruct ourselves toward success or be the limiting factor in this pursuit. When specifically applying the meaning of this quote to distance running there are countless examples that coaches and athletes share to provide a narrative to illustrate this concept. These stories highlight successful performances of “mind over matter” or cautionary tales of the “weakminded” that underperformed. Walk around any high school cross-country meet and there will be sayings and quotes that summarize these tales printed on the back of team sweatshirts to remind the athletes on race day of these important lessons. Likely the most recognizable of these inspirational figures is Steve Prefontaine.

Of his many memorable quotes there is one that you likely have not read on the back of a high school sweatshirt which provides insight into his internal dialog during competition. In 1974 Prefontaine competed against Frank Shorter in an epic dual over 3-miles in the Heyward Restoration Meet. Shorter opened a lead in the final quarter mile on Prefontaine at the legendary Oregon track while running under American Record pace. Prefontaine rallied late, catching and eventually passing shorter with 80m to go, finishing in a new American Record. A friend on the infield after the race asked Pre, “what happened out there? I thought you slowed down.” Pre’s candid response offers a rare glimpse of the internal dialog of an elite athlete during the most stressful parts of a record setting distance race (Jordan, 1997): “Yeah, I almost let him win. I was just thinking it wasn’t that big a deal. Then, I don’t know, something inside of me just said, ‘Hey, wait a minute, I want to beat him,’ and I just took off!” These post race statements may sound familiar to coaches and athletes that have FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

41

talk your way to the top found themselves or their athletes in similar race situations. The situation (environment) can be suggestive to athletes and affect their thoughts and influence their behaviors, but ultimately it is the athlete who controls their own behavior (performance). This concept is described by the Sport Specific Self-Talk Model (Van Raalte, Vincent & Brewer, 2015) which explains that contextual factors such as environment affect athletes performance. In distance running the environment that can influence our thoughts can be external or internal to an athletes. The external environment can be the weather (hot, cold, rain, snow), the course (hilly, flat), the footing (solid, loose), the crowd as was the case for Prefontaine in his final lap in the previous example (in support or against), the competitors (being caught, pulling away or being passed), or the time on the clock (on pace or off pace). The internal environment is related to the athlete’s sensations and perceptions within ones body. This includes muscle fatigue, burning sensation in the legs from acidosis, increased respiration, and sweating. Ideally our athletes will find themselves in an environment that facilitates the formation of thoughts that aid in performance. However, we know that many times athletes are required to perform on days in which the external environment is less than desirable. On top of that many times our athletes internal environment may suggest that their goal or objective for the race is unlikely to occur. In these cases do our athletes give up? Do we as coaches tell them to give in to the suggestions of their internal and external environment? No, as Prefontaine said to start the quote, “I almost let him win.” By phrasing the statement as “let” he implies that he would have been consciously giving into his environment which found him down by 10 meters to Frank Shorter with a lap to go in a 3-mile race. His entire environment was not stacked against him. He did have the roar of the home track crowd supporting him as he regained his control over his thoughts and had the internal conversation with himself of, “I want to beat him.”

Research and Theoretical Underpinnings of Performance Enhancing Self-Talk Development Current endurance sport research is providing evidence in support of this nar42

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

rative. Over the last two decades many in the endurance community have been aware of Dr. Tim Nokes and his Central Governor Model. In this model Noakes proposes that the central nervous system uses feedback from different physiological systems and regulates performance in order to ensure that biological harm does not occur during endurance exercise. Further, fatigue is proposed to be a result of the conscious perception and interpretation of subconscious regulatory process in the brain that effects pacing of endurance exercise (Noakes, 2007; Noakes, Gibson, Lambert, 2005). The concept that the limiting factor in endurance performance is not physiological failure has continued in recent research by Samuele Marcora and colleagues (Marcora, Bosio & Morree, 2008; Marcora, Staiano & Manning, 2009; Marcora, Saiano, 2010; Marcora, 2010; Blanchfield, Hardy, Morree, Staniano & Marcora, 2013). This model differs from the Central Governor Model in its explanation of the control of performance limitation. The Psychobiological Model of endurance performance puts forward the idea that the limiting factor in endurance performance is ultimately when an athlete consciously decides to terminate the exercise (Marcora, 2013). In common terms this is the moment when an athlete “gives up” on their goal or objective. When this “giving up” occurs is the difference between who wins and who looses, who makes the time standard and who does not, or who achieves a personal record and who falls short. If the limitation to endurance performance is psychological then what mental skills can coaches teach and athletes develop to delay “giving up,” and to “push through” to “perform their best.” The answer to this is in another theoretical model. The Sport Specific Self-Talk Model (Van Raatle et al., 2015) explains that personal factors (personality, genetic factors, emotional intelligence, ect.), contextual factors (environment, competition, etc.) and self-talk are mediated through conscious (system 2) and subconscious thoughts (system 1) and affect the athlete’s behavior (performance). An athlete that I once worked with stated that when she performs her best she doesn’t think when an athlete comes on her shoulder late in a race she just reacts and takes off. This model explains this

behavior as being initiated through our sub-conscious thoughts (system 1) which is automatic, fast and desired to improve athletes performance in this situation. Unfortunately sub-conscious thoughts are difficult to modify because they take place below our level of awareness (Van Raalte et al., 2015). However, practicing self-talk has been found to improve performance (Hatzigeorgiadis et al., 2011) and it is suggested that practicing conscious self-talk (system 2) could shift the self-talk to our athlete’s sub-conscious (system 1) (Van Raalte et al., 2015). Knowing that the limitation to our performance lies in when we eventually psychologically “give up” we can apply what we have learned from the Sport Specific Self-Talk Model by training what we have the most control over. We have little or no control over our athletes’ personal characteristic or contextual factors but we can influence self-talk through the practice of mental skills training. When working with distance runners mental performance coaches or distance coaches can prepare their athletes by developing performance enhancing affirmations – or strong statements that aid in the athletes performance. The following is a system that I developed while working with distance runners as a mental performance consultant at the University of Missouri and Southern Methodist University. Although there are additional components to the entire mental training program the following mental skill development program can be utilized by mental performance consultants and coaches to improve selftalk and performance for their endurance athletes.

General Performance Enhancing Self-Talk Development There are two objectives to this part of the self-talk development process. 1) Initiate development of self-awareness of the athlete’s internal dialog. 2) Facilitate the athlete’s development of affirmations that will aid in the athlete’s performance. Before addressing the two objectives of this part it is imperative that the athlete understands and accepts two foundational concepts that will allow the development of performance enhancing self-talk and many other mental skills. First, an athlete has the ability to think one discrete conscious thought at a time. An athlete may disagree with this concept. Many

successful athletes and the athlete that is struggling: Recently Successful Athlete: Describe to me what you have been thinking about during your last race? • What are you thinking about the 24-48 hours before the competition? • During Warm-up what are you thinking about? • When standing at the line what are you doing and what are you thinking about? • Once the gun goes off and during the beginning of the race what is your internal conversation? • When it is the point of the race when your body begins to hurt what are your thoughts? • In the later stages of the race, when you know that you will make it to the finish line and the only question is how fast will you get there what is your internal dialog? During your hard workouts what are you thinking about? • What is the environment like at practice that is allowing you to be successful? (Who and how many people are you running with, how excited are you for your workouts, what is the objective of your practices)

people believe that they are exceptional at multitasking or even suffer from attention deficit disorder that makes it impossible for them to think only one thought. A person may be able to think many thoughts in rapid succession or even think in depth about a small number of thoughts over a short period of time. However, all athletes have the ability to think one discrete conscious thought at a time. The second foundational understanding builds on the fact that we can think one thought at a time and allows for us to build mental skills. This concept is that we choose our thoughts. As discussed earlier the environment, our situation, may suggest or influence our thoughts however ultimately we choose our one discrete conscious thought. Through understanding this concept it empowers the athlete

with the ability to choose thoughts that are productive toward their goal or objective. Once an athlete understands and accepts these foundational concepts they can begin developing the mental skill of performance enhancing self-talk. Part 1: Developing Self-Awareness of Self-Talk The development of performance enhancing self-talk begins with an analysis of the athlete’s current internal dialog. Semistructured interview questions assist the coach or mental performance consultant in facilitating the athlete’s self-awareness of their internal dialog. I differentiate my interview schedule based upon the athlete that I am working with in terms of recent performances; an example script is provided for two types of athletes, recently

photo courtesy of University of Oregon Athletics

Recently Struggling Athlete: What is the best race you have ever ran? Tell me in detail everything about that race? • What were you thinking about during that race? • When the race was difficult, when you were hurting, when you had competition what went through your mind and how did you physically respond? • What were you thinking about leading up to that race? Describe to me what you have been thinking about during your last race? • What are you thinking about the 24-48 hours before the competition? • During Warm-up what are you thinking about? • When standing at the line what are you doing and what are you thinking about? • Once the gun goes off and during the beginning of the race what is your internal conversation? • When it is the point of the race when your body begins to hurt what are your thoughts? • In the later stages of the race, when you know that you will make it to the finFEBRUARY 2017 techniques

43

talk your way to the top ish line and the only question is how fast will you get there what is your internal dialog? How successful have you been during hard workouts? • If you have been successful what do you think is the difference between workouts and races? What are thinking about during these workouts? This activity facilitates the athlete’s development of self-awareness related to their thoughts during workouts and races. It also assists the coach or mental performance consultant in continuing the conversation and activity for achieving the second objective of the session. Part 2: Developing Performance Enhancing Affirmations The second activity is facilitating the athlete’s development of affirmations that aid in their performance. This activity engages the athlete by having them write with a pencil on a blank sheet of paper affirmations that will aid their performance. It is important that the coach or mental performance consultant does not lead the athlete in this process as the affirmations will be more impactful if they emerge from the athlete in their own words. Again, a semi-structured interview schedule is helpful to facilitate this activity. Regardless of the athletes recent success the following three prompts will facilitate the formation of performance enhancing affirmations. Instruct the athlete to write down a minimum of five affirmations for each of the prompts. Affirmation Development Activity Prompts: • Write down five strong positive statements about yourself. (They do not have to be running specific) • Write down five statements related to your strengths as a person in general and as a runner. • Write down five statements related to challenges that when you overcome will lead to your success. This is a slow process as conversation related to each affirmation is necessary for the athlete in many cases to understand its importance and the impact it will have on their future performances. Many times athlete that have had success recently will move rather quickly through this activity. It is important to remind them that developing an understanding of what is working for them will aid in their future

44

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

performances and continued success. For these athletes this may be a list of “what is working” to gently remind them to continue this internal conversation. For athletes that are struggling they may have difficulty coming up with positive statements about themselves. At times they may need additional probing questions to get their pencil moving about themselves in a positive context. This tangible list that is created can continue the self-talk development outside of this session. Athletes should be instructed to take the list with them and place it somewhere that they will see it multiple times everyday. This may be a planner, on a desk, taped to a bathroom mirror or they can reproduce it digitally to be set as a back screen on a cell phone. Having one meeting about this topic can help an athlete, however if it is read over multiple times a day it can begin the process of reprogramming the athletes self-talk. Additionally, strongly encourage the athlete to read the list before the next hard workout and begin to consciously integrate the statements into the stressful moments in practice. Following that workout instruct the athlete to revisit the list, star or highlight the statements that the athlete finds helpful to their performance, erase any statements that do not help, and add any statements that work that are not present on the list. This process creates a “living document” that continually evolves and aids the athlete in achieving their best performance. Continuing the Development of Performance Enhancing Self-Talk: The mental skill development activity described can be used as a stand-alone method to facilitate performance enhancing self-talk that will benefit successful and struggling athletes. For optimum benefit this mental skill can be integrated into a comprehensive mental training program consisting of race planning, concentration routines, arousal control routines, visualization and other mental skills to prepare the athlete to perform their best in competition.

References Blanchfield, A. W., Hardy, J., de Morree, H. M., Staiano, W., & Marcora, S. M. (2014).Talking yourself out of exhaustion: the effects of self-talk on endurance performance. Journal of Medicine Science,

Sports, and Exercise, 46, 998-1007. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Zourbanos, N., Galanis, E., & Theodorakis, Y. (2011). Selftalk and sport performance: a meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 354- 362. Jordan, T. (1997). Pre: The story if America’s greatest running legend, Steve Prefontaine (2nd ed., pp. 107-108). Emmaus, PA: Royale Press, Inc. Marcora, S. M., Bosio, A., & de Morree, H. M. (2008). Locomotor muscle fatigue increases cardiorespiratory responses and reduces performance during intense cycling exercise independently from metabolic stress. American Journal of Regulatory Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 294, 874-883. Marcora, S. M., Staiano, W., & Manning, V. (2009). Mental fatigue impairs physical performance in humans. Journal of Applied Physiology, 106, 857-864. Marcora, S. M., & Staiano, W. (2010). The limit to exercise tolerance in humans: mind over muscle?. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 109(4), 763-770. Marcora, S. (2010). Perception of Effort. In E. B. Goldstein (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Perception (pp. 380-383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Noakes, T., Gibson, A., & Lambert, E. (2004). From catastrophe to complexity: A novel model of integrative central neural regulation of effort and fatigue during exercise in humans. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(4), 511-514. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2003.009860 Noakes, T. D. (2007). The central governor model of exercise regulation applied to the marathon. Sports Medicine, 37(4-5), 374-377. doi:10.2165/00007256200737040-00026 Van Raalte, J. L., Vincent, A., & Brewer, B. W. (2016). Self-Talk: Review and sportspecific model. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 139-148.

Derek Marr is a lecturer at Southern Methodist University in the Sport Performance Leadership concentration and a mental performance consultant with the SMU Track & Field / Cross Country programs. He is a former volunteer assistant coach Baylor University and Head Cross Country Coach at Northwood University.

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

45

46 techniques FEBRUARY 2017

Mike Kiral-SLU Athletics photo

Sprint-Interval Cycling Training

The Effect Of Tabata Protocol On Collegiate Level Distance Runners Brandon Chapoton

W

hen studying the growth of marathon participation, Fredericson and Misra (2007) found that a sudden increase in running volume, especially above the 40 miles per week threshold, is one of the strongest independent risk factors linked with running injuries.1 Studies have shown that short-term sprint interval training (SIT) and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) protocols have the ability to improve health-related indices, including cardiorespiratory fitness and markers of glycemic control in healthy individuals.2 Â It has also been recognized that relatively short-term SIT and HIIT protocols can rapidly enhance aerobic capacity metabolism and elicit certain remodeling of the physiological system similar to that of moderate intensity continuous training (MICT).2 Some of the current research trends are aimed at the physiological improvements that

occur in moderately trained (avg. 25 miles/week), older individuals.3 One study found that after two-weeks of HIIT training there were no significant improvements on VO2max for any of the groups tested.3 While others have found that high intensity SIT provides increases in VO2max that are commonly associated with exercise at moderate intensity over long periods of time.4 Then there are those that found moderate improvements of VO2max, but nothing significant.5 After seven sessions of SIT, it has been shown that there is a decrease in maximal heart rate during moderate intensity exercise.6 When previous studies were conducted, participants weren’t asked to continue their running or training outside of the testing performed. Therefore, we will conduct a study on collegiate level distance runners utilizing the Tabata protocol four times a week for two-weeks, while still

allowing the participants the ability to run a set amount of mileage a week (40 vs. 60 miles). The purpose of this research experiment was to determine whether Tabata training on a cycle ergometer four times a week for two-weeks would help maintain cardiorespiratory fitness in collegiate level distance runners. It was hypothesized that substituting 20 (M) and 15 (F) miles in a trained crosscountry runner’s weekly training with 4 sessions of Tabata on a cycle ergometer for two-weeks would maintain VO2max.

METHODS Experimental Approach to the Problem All student-athletes (SA) completed a preliminary session. The preliminary session consisted of an assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness and anthropometric measurements. The SA were then randomized into two separate

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

47

sprint-interval cycling training

groups, an experimental (EXP) and a control (CON) group. The EXP group completed eight sessions of a Tabata while the CON group only participated in running activities throughout the length of the study. After, there was one final session in order to measure VO2max post intervention. A certified athletic trainer was present at all sessions. Participants The participants were 10 NCAA Division I cross-country runners (n=10, male=5, female=5). All SA provided written informed consent before participation 48 techniques NOVEMBER 2016

and completed a medical history questionnaire. In order to participate in collegiate athletics, the SA had been previously cleared with a team physician at the start of their season. SA were randomized into two groups (n=5 EXP, n=5 CON). The SA were EXP=19.33±1.03, CON=19±1.41 years old, with an average height (in cm) of EXP CON=58.28±8.21. All athletes were given specific instructions based on which group they were in. Due to sample size, the men and women were grouped together.

Preliminary Session All sessions were conducted in the Southeastern Louisiana University Exercise Physiology Laboratory. The preliminary session consisted of anthropometric measurements and a VO2max test. Anthropometric measurements included height and weight using a stadiometer, blood pressure measured using a sphygmomanometer and stethoscope, and resting heart rate using Polar® WearLink® coded HR monitor and FT7 watch (Polar Electro Inc., Lake Success, NY). In order to determine base VO2max, the Ellestad protocol was used.7 The test was comMike Kiral-SLU Athletics photo

Figure 1. VO2max values from pre- and posttest

Figure 2. Average running pace (minutes per mile) from Conference Championships to Regional meet.

pleted on a Cardiac Science™ Quinton® Q Stress® TM 65 treadmill (Mortara Instrument, Inc., Milwaukee, WI). During the test, VO2 was measured using the Parvo Medics’ TrueOne® 2400 metabolic analysis system (Parvo Medics, Sandy, UT), and heart rate was monitored using the aforementioned heart rate monitor. The test started with a three-minute warm up at 1.7 mph and 10% grade. Stages 2-8 were each two minutes long. Stage 2 was at 3.0 mph and a 10% grade, stage 3 was 40 mph at a 10% grade, and stage 4 and 5 were both at 5 mph, with grades of 10% and 15% respectively. Stages 6,7, and 8

were completed at a 15% grade and at 6.0 mph, 7.0 mph, and 8.0 mph, respectively. The test was completed when the SA reached exhaustion. A heart rate close to 200 bpm or the SA felt as if they could not continue constituted the SA met exhaustion. All SA completed the preliminary sessions. =171.17±6.03, CON=170.20±11.62 and weight (in kg) of EXP=62.07±6.88, Experimental Sessions The CON group was instructed to run 60 miles per week if male and 30 miles per week if female at 70% of VO2max

(VDOT chart was used). The miles were planned for the week and self-reported by the SA. The experimental group reported to the exercise physiology lab for training four times a week for two-weeks. These sessions substituted 20 miles of training for the males and 15 miles of training for the females; SA completed 40 miles if male and 15 miles if female of running over the remainder of the week. Before the sessions, resting heart rate and blood pressure were measured. The exercise protocol was a Tabata protocol that included a five-minute warm-up at 0.5 kp on an Ergomedic 828E Monark Bike (Mortara Instrument, Milwaukee, WI, USA). It was then set to a resistance of 5% of the SA body weight (in kg) and the SA completed a total of eight (8) 20-second sprints with 10-seconds of recovery (pedaling at 0.5 kp) in between each sprint. Revolutions were counted every 5-seconds to determine power output, and heart rate was recorded after each sprint. During the sprints, the SA were instructed to pedal as fast as they could. After the protocol was completed, SA did a four-minute cool down at a resistance of 0.5 kp. After completion, heart rate and blood pressure were recorded two-minutes post. During the sixth experimental session, cardiorespiratory metabolic analysis was recorded using the Parvo Medics’ system in order to determine VO2 and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) during the Tabata protocol. Final Session After all experimental sessions were completed, all participants were required to report for one final session. The final session included a VO2max test on the treadmill to determine if NOVEMBER 2016 techniques

49

sprint-interval cycling training

Figure 3. Peak power output during each 20-second stage of the Tabata sessions for all eight sessions

there was a change in VO2max after completion of the Tabata sessions. Heart rate and blood pressure were measured again before and after the test, and the Ellestad protocol was again used.

the EXP group, but decreased from pretest to posttest in the CON group (see Figure 1). Analysis of these data using a 2 (Group) x 2 (Test) repeated measures ANOVA yielded no significant differences: Group: F(1,8)=0.25, p>0.05, Test: F(1,8)=2.51, p>0.05, Group x Test interaction: F(1,8)=2.09, p>0.05. Running pace increased slightly from the conference to regional meet in CON group, whereas pace in the EXP group decreased, or got faster (See Figure 2). The results of a 2 (Group) x 2 (Meet) repeated measures ANOVA indicated no significant Group or meet main effect. However, the Group x Meet interaction approached significance, F (1,6)=5.60, p=0.056. If you look at Figure 3, you can see that over the course of the training intervention, the SA became more acclimated to the biking sessions, and were able to pedal faster.

Statistical Analysis All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 20. To evaluate the impact of the Tabata program on VO2max, 2 (group) x 2 (test) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare pre- and post-program VO2max scores between the CON and experimental group. To gauge the significance of the Tabata protocol on running pace (avg. mile pace per race), a 2 (group) x 2 (meet) repeated measures ANOVA analysis was conducted to analyze differences between treatment and CON groups’ at two different time points. Finally, Excel 2013 was used to find the average height, weight, and age of the SA, as well as the peak power output over the course of the eight Tabata sessions.

DISCUSSION

Results VO2max remained at the same level for

Our experimental hypothesis that VO2max would be maintained in collegiate distance runners completing

50

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

a two-week Tabata training (SIT) was indeed tenable. Research has shown that sprint interval cycling training is able to maintain, if not improve, running performance over a short period of time. This includes VO2max measurements.3 A decrease (or faster pace) in average time per mile was also found in the experimental group in this study. This may be due to the substitution of SIT in place of impact training on the track. SIT decreases the loading stress placed upon lower extremity joints, while still applying the necessary stresses on the joints, tendons, and musculature necessary to maintain athletic performance. The decrease in the CON group’s VO2max may be due to the lack of ‘true’ workouts beyond just running at a steady 70% of VO2max pace. It may also be due to the time of year we tested. We conducted this experiment at the end of a long training block and competitive season. There were some limitations during this study. The primary limitation of this study was the sample size. While the sample was divided evenly based on gender, there were only 10 participants

total. Future studies should expand the sample size, possibly recruiting from regional universities or through the local population based on fitness level. Another limitation of this study was the time frame in which the study was completed. Due to delays by the researchers, data collection was compacted into four sessions per week rather than stretched out over more time. This may have caused decrease performance in our participants due to fatigue. When conducting future studies, researchers should use a larger sample size. A sample size of 20 should be the minimum sample size. Testing protocol may also be adjusted to correct for possible fatigue experienced by participants. It may be optimal to perform the Tabata training protocol three times a week for six weeks. Researchers could also examine the effects of SIT on different blood markers, including lactate and glucose responses.

CONCLUSION Based on the results of this study, a Tabata training protocol completed four times a week for 2 weeks has demonstrated maintenance of some cardiorespiratory measurements in collegiate

long distance runners. This study is the first of its kind and should be expanded upon. With a larger sample size, the study may demonstrate truly significant results. Substituting running mileage but still maintaining performance is important for many disciplines, including track and field. This could make a great addition to any coaches or fitness professionals’ toolbox.

References 1. Fredericson M, Misra AK. Epidemiology and aetiology of marathon running injuries. J Sports Med 2007; 37(4-5): 437-439. 2. Gibala MJ, Gillen JB, Percival ME. Physiological and health-related adaptations to low-volume interval training: Influences of nutrition and sex. J Sports Med. 2014; S127-S137. 3. Kavaliauskas M, Aspe, RR, Babraj J. High-intensity cycling training: the effect of work-to-rest intervals on running performance measures. J Strength Cond Res. 2015; 2229-2236. 4. MacDougall JD, Hicks AL, MacDonald, JR, McKelvie RS, Green HJ, Smith KM. Muscle performance and enzymatic adaptations to sprint interval training. J App Physiol. 1998; 84(6): 2138-2142. 5. Denham J, Feros SA, O’Brien BJ. Four

weeks of sprint interval training improves 5-km run performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2015; 2137-2141. 6. Talanian JL, Galloway SD, Heigenhauser GJ, Bonen A, Spriet LL. Two weeks of high-intensity aerobic interval training increases the capacity for fat oxidation during exercise in women. J Appl Physiology. 2007; 102(4): 1439-1447. 7. Chavda, VV, Rajput, MH, Parmar, C, Gokhale, PA, Mehta, HB, Shah, CJ. Predicted maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) values obtained during the maximal treadmill test using different protocols. J Integ Res Med. 2013; 4(2): 149-155. 8. Silder A, Gleason K, Thelen DG. Influence of bicycle seat tube angle and hand position on lower extremity kinematics and neuromuscular control: Implications for triathlon running performance. J Appl Biomech. 2011; 27: 297-305.

Brandon Chapoton is a former Assistant track and field coach (Distance) at Southeastern Louisiana University. He currently works as a professional fitness coach in New Orleans, LA.

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

51

Meet kirby lee photo

Director

Planning and Management

Austin Brobst, M.S., and Leo Settle, M.S.

T

he benefits of hosting a meet at home are countless, but the most common reasons programs host home meets are because they can be more cost effective than traveling, and also help in building community support for the program. In addition, home meets allow programs the ability to fundraise while providing student-athletes the ability to compete at home in a comfortable and familiar environment. Whether this is the first meet you put on or if you are a seasoned veteran, meet management and planning will always have an element of

surprise and excitement. The aim of this article is to provide valuable meet management suggestions and assist with the planning and management time line. Keep in mind each meet and facility are unique, thus making creativity and flexibility important when matching event needs to environment. Organizing and hosting a track meet is a large yet rewarding undertaking by a program. The easiest way to approach a home meet is breaking the event into smaller tasks. Smaller tasks become less intimidating, feasible, and easier to handle when tackled one or two at

a time over an extended period of time. Below we have outlined the tasks and corresponding timeline, followed by expansion on the most important areas:

Six Months Prior to the Meet General Meet Preparations Summer and Fall tend to be more relaxed times for coaches and support staff, during these periods it is recommended that the initial tasks associated with hosting a home meet or meets be put into place. These initial items include reserving appropriate facilities, reserving the timing company, provide parFEBRUARY 2017 techniques

53

meet director

Timeline Summary for Meet Organization Reserve Stadium date and inform other programs who share it Reserve timing company Contact teams with meet date (NCAA counter may be a concern) Tentative meet packet (program site, USATF, USTFCCCA, Twitter, Facebook) Contact hotels for room rates and/or set up Host Hotel Contact and reserve announcer Contact officials, volunteers, and sponsors Check equipment and place orders Follow up with official and volunteers and sign-up board Order bib numbers, pins, awards, officials and volunteer shirts Organize concession Check stadium power, water, and timing board working Finalize official and volunteer schedule Secure hotel rooms for officials Set up needs for host hotel Revise event schedule and finals notes Set-up field events, tents, flags, and sound system Medical and Trainer set up Create team packets Team packet pick up

ticipating institutions meet information and receive their confirmation of attendance. In order to help with this process, one can send out emails directly to coaches or utilized social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.). When sending out initial meet dates and times, it is also recommended to send a tentative copy of the meet schedule to the programs in order to allow travel and budget planning. Hotel Rooms Due to an increase in occupancy at hotels during most meets it is a good idea to secure room rates and/or blocks for teams to utilize during their stay. The easiest way to secure rates and/or blocks through the sales manager at the hotel(s). From our experience we have found that most hotels are accommo-

54

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

dating to work with because they want their rooms occupied and revenue being brought to the property. Once an agreed upon rate has been worked out with the respective hotel(s) it is recommended that this information and a contact at the hotel in the meet information. When working with hotels it is important to remember that individuals associated with the meet production might need lodging as well, such as timing company and officials, so make sure to reserve a block of rooms for those individuals. If the rooms are not utilized they can always be released back to the teams. Announcer The meet announcer is a key piece in the production of the meet. This individual should have a vast knowledge of track and field, the meet schedule, rules,

7 months prior 7 months prior 7 months prior 6 months prior 6 months prior 6 months prior 5 months prior 4 months prior 2 months prior 2 months prior 1 month prior 2 weeks prior 1-2 weeks prior 1-2 weeks prior 1-3 days prior 1-2 days prior 1 day prior 24-12 hours prior 24-12 hours prior 12-2 hours prior

and current records. When seeking an announcer, it’s important to find an individual who has the ability to speak clearly, fluidly, expressively, and convey the facts, mood, and feeling of current events. Announcers not only serve in the roll of informing spectators and competitors of what is happening within the meet, but can also provide updates from events not on the oval. Logistically the announcer should have communication with field event officials, the host institution coaching staff, and the timing company. Communication can occur thought multiple platforms such as walkie talkie, cell phone, and/or group messaging apps. Timing Company A professional timing company will need to be confirmed at least six months

KIRBY LEE photo

meet director

in advance. Good timing companies bid for quality meets and will fill their annual schedule quickly. Your contract with the timing company should spell out specifically what services they will provide and include a detailed list of equipment that they will provide.

56

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

It is imperative for the timing company hardware and software equipment to be NCAA and USATF compliant. The hardware should be functional for any type of weather. The software should be compatible with the meet management entry platform. Some track programs

may need to manage and submit the electronic entry file to the company, whereas some companies completely handle the entry process as part of their service. The timer should be compliant with submitting the final results to the Track & Field Results Reporting System

kirby lee photo

Five to Two Months Prior to the Meet

(TFRRS) and/or USATF systems. Finally, the contract should spell out what the needs of the timing are for hotel rooms and number of nights and/or overnight storage for equipment.

Officials Having a competent officiating crew is as important as having a timing company. Officiating meets can be long hours and sometimes in less than ideal conditions, because of this, as a meet director one should plan to dedicate an adequate amount of the overall meet budget to compensating officials accordingly. The following are recommendations for areas that traditionally need certified officials and a minimum number: 1. Starters (2) 2. Clerk of Course (1) *This individual needs to have a great track and field knowledge as they will be the “director” of all things track related 3. Finish Line/Lap Counter (2) 4. Check-In (1) 5. Exchange Zones (3) 6. Vertical Jumps (2 at each event) 7. Horizontal Jumps (3 at each pit depending on measuring device) 8. Throws (2 at each event) *Note that these are just the minimum number of certified officials that should be available for each event, there is still a significant need for “helpers” which will be addressed later in this article. Finding individuals who are willing to forfeit their Friday/Saturday/ Sunday to work a track meet is often times the most difficult task, which makes it important to compensate

these individuals for their time. Traditionally, head officials at an event would receive about $100.00$150.00 a day and their assistants would receive $50.00-$75.00 per day depending on the final numbers of the event. When starting to create a pool of officials a good starting point is the local USATF Association as they traditionally have an email list or list serve of qualified officials in the area. Initially when contacting officials, it’s recommended to ask their preferred event and secondary event. Having this information will allow the coordinator of officials to assign individuals to appropriate areas. It is important to remember the officials are choosing to work your meet instead of pursuing other activities so, therefore try to place the officials in events where they feel most qualified. Volunteers Track and field events require a generous number of volunteers. Key volunteer duties include hurdle crew, sand pit raking, implement retrievers, clerk of the course, and finish line, these are the “helpers” mentioned earlier. There are many community organizations that require a certain number of volunteer hours such as: campus Greek life, businesses, scout troops, troubled youth programs, youth organizations, and military. In addition to the above organizations non-

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

57

meet director competing student-athletes can serve in a non-officiating capacity. Volunteers should be approached similar to officials in that they could have other more pressing activities to be doing on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday, making it important to show appreciation to these groups for their time and effort. To show such appreciation the program can present these individuals and/or groups with a T-shirt, gift, and/ or announcement of the group during the meet. In addition to recognition make sure to provide plenty of food and water for both volunteers and officials. Remember volunteers should be utilized in non-officiating roles, whenever possible, certified officials should be given the power to comment on event discrepancies. Below is a recommendation for the number of volunteers to be placed at each event: 1. Hurdles (10) 2. Start/Finish Line (Minimum of 1) 3. Horizontal Jumps (Minimum of 2 per pit) 4. Vertical Jumps (Minimum of 2 per pit) 5. Throws (Minimum of 2 per event) Equipment Approximately four months prior to the meet one should create a list of equipment requirements and begin to price out and order the necessities. When ordering equipment make sure to place the order in advance to avoid any back order situations and allow enough time for shells, which have to be transported via ground. Below are some key pieces of equipment that are necessary for any home meet: • Shells/blanks for the starter • Crossbars • Measuring tapes (or scopes/lasers) • Chalk for pole vault and throws • Speakers/sound system • Display boards & wind gauges for throw and jump performances • Boards for horizontal jumps • Shovels & rakes for horizontal jumps • Hip numbers • Tables & chairs for officials • Scales/measuring devices for throwing implements • Starting Blocks 58

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

• Hurdles • Bib numbers & pins • Tents • Flagging

One Month to One Week Prior to the Meet Officials It is recommended to reconnect with officials confirm and they are still available to work. This correspondence also serves as a good time to gather personal information for payment. Once the final headcount of officials is gathered, it’s best to send their final duties and assignments on the five or six days prior to the meet, just in case any scheduling conflicts have come up. In addition, when sending out official information, make sure to include report times and officiating groups. When planning for official report times, be sure to factor in warm ups, which are typically one hour prior to events. At this time it is also recommended to find out how many officials will need hotels. It is safe to assume that all out of state officials will need a room, and some in-state officials could fall into this category as well especially if they live a few hours away and the meet runs late into the evening. If possible it’s best to have each official in their own room, but if necessary find out from officials if they have a roommate preference. Once it is determined how many hotel rooms you will need, reach back out to the director of sales at the host hotel and have the officials name placed on the reserved room. Also be sure to notify the official which hotel they will be staying at, being sure to include address and point of contact at the hotel should there be any issues. This is also the time to schedule medical authorities (EMS, Fire, etc). Concessions The month prior to the meet is a good time to secure food contracts for student-athletes, officials, and volunteers. When securing contracts or arraignments it helps to be creative with planning, social media, school foundation’s, and/or fundraising organizations can help out immensely when it comes to raising capital. This can include sup-

plying a company or restaurant who has donated with publicity via the programs social media outlets, or giving back to the company/organization in terms of volunteer work to help offset some of the associated costs. Facility As the meet approaches, it’s important to make sure that the facility is in good shape. The big ticket items that should be checked first are the score board (if you plan to use one for results and meet information), water supply for sand or steeple pits, and power in press boxes, medical area, and other areas where power may be needed. Once all physical preparations are complete, ancillary items like tents, copiers, speaker systems and anything else that might need to be rented should be set up. Security measures should be put in place either through the school or an outside organization to provide security for fans, officials, and studentathletes during the time of meet.

Week of the Meet Schedule Leading up to the week of the meet most of the big-ticket items should be squared away and ready to go, but the details are what can set your meet apart from other meets. First action item on this list should be to finalize the time schedule and make sure that it is feasible to complete all the events in the scheduled time based on final number of entrants. Once registration closes, numbers should be looked at and the schedule should be adjusted accordingly to eliminate down time or extended depending on specific event numbers. A few guidelines to help plan for enough time during and between events is as follows: For field events, a good officiating crew can typically work through each participant in 60-90 seconds per attempt, so it’s best to plan for 90 seconds per attempt. Time management is crucial if you only have one pit or throwing area as you’ll want to make sure there is ample warm up time between flights and/or genders. For the track events a good starter and clerk can typically get a race staged and

ready to go within 90 seconds from the completion of the previous race. That said, take the race time and add about 90 seconds, i.e. for the men’s 100 at the college level a good crew should be able to fire the gun every two minutes. When setting up an indoor schedule if your facility doesn’t have a separate high jump area your straight sprint and hurdle events should be run first to allow high jump to occur while all oval events are taking place. The same is true during the outdoor season with javelin and the high jump apron. Facility During the week of the meet it is recommended to plan for the facility to be ready to go at least 24 hours prior to it being open for warm ups. This includes the following: • Flagging set up to keep athletes and spectators out of areas that shouldn’t be accessed • Tents set up for teams • Appropriate signage in place for visiting teams and spectators • Field event pits/fields/boards are prepped and installed (if needed) • Sound system has been checked and is ready for operation • Timing company has necessary connections and power supplies • Hurdles and barriers are stacked or nearby for easy access during race day placement • Clerking area is set up with chairs, hip numbers, etc Medical When setting up the medical area it is important to remember that there will more than likely be more than one team set up in the space. With that being said, make sure there is plenty of space and power supplies for various medical devices. Medical areas should also be positioned to allow trainers and EMS quick access to the finish line and area of competition in the event of an emergency. Meet Packet Meet packet pick up is the last central intelligence for coaches. At the time the Meet Packet is picked up it should be verified that the program has paid their

entry fee, either online or in person. Inside the Meet Packet should be the following information: • Coach and athlete credentials • Bib numbers • Finals Schedule • Heat sheets • Implement weigh-in time and location • Check-in time and location • Clerk of the course reporting time • Coaching boxes • Hospitality tent • Relay cards • Site Map

amount a family will spend on a Friday or Saturday.

Overview While a great deal of planning and preparation are required to host a successful home meet, the rewards are equally as great. Student-athletes will feel more comfortable competing at home, which can lead to better performances. The program will be setting a precedent within the community that the institution values communitybased events and welcomes everyone in the surrounding area to attend local gatherings.

Revenue Creating revenue from cross country/ track and field meets can be a difficult task, even when dealing with events like the NCAA Championships. We have found the best way to create a revenue stream is through team/individual entry fee, merchandise/concession, and admission costs. Entry fee can vary depending on the quality of the meet as well as quantity of student-athletes. An effective way to determine entry fee is to examine what other institutions are charging and base the rates accordingly. Merchandise and concession sales will be your second highest revenue stream. When working with merchandise and concessions it is best to check with the marketing department at the university because there could be previous contracts established with certain vendors for athletic events. If such contracts do not exist then it is recommended to reach out to local screen printers and catering companies and see what contract terms can be reached for the meet. The third and final potential revenue stream is admission to the meet. Depending on the institution, meet admission costs may be handled by Event Management. If your institution does not have an Event Management staff in place it is recommended to keep ticket costs in line with the admission to other sporting events, somewhere between the $5-$30. A marketing rule of thumb when setting admission fees is you want to keep the total cost equivalent to attending a movie, as this is the average dollar

Austin Brobst, M.S. is an assistant coach Northwestern University. Leo Settle, M.S. is an assistant coach at the University of Texas at El Paso. Both Brobst and Settle tenured at University of New Mexico and during their time the program hosted several Championships including: Mountain West Conference (Cross Country, Indoors, and Outdoors) and USATF Indoors Championships. A special thank you to Dr. Richard Ceronie. Without his years of meet management experience and guidance, much of this article would not have been possible. FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

59

ustfccca supporters

Through their ongoing support of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association, these companies demonstrate their strong commitment to the sports of Track & Field and Cross Country. The USTFCCCA strongly encourages each member to purchase products and services from these supporters.

ucsspirit.com connorsports.com

beynonsports.com

hokaoneone.com

rekortanspurtanadvpolytech.com stockmeier-urethanes.com

theledrabbit.com

balfour.com gotracktownusa.com

directathletics.com gillathletics.com

richeyathletics.com 60

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

finalsurge.com

ucsspirit.com mfathletic.com

asicsamerica.com

coachesdirectory.com

trainingpeaks.com

vsathletics.com

mondoworldwide.com maxmedals.com

newbalanceteamathletics.com

elliptigo.com

FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

61

2016 National Athletes and Coaches of the Year ustfccca division i

Maurica Powell Oregon Peter Tegen Women’s Coach of the Year

Eric Heins Northern Arizona Bill Dellinger Men’s Coach of the Year

Karissa Schweizer Missouri Women’s Athlete of the Year

Patrick Tiernan Villanova Men’s Athlete of the Year

Damon Martin Adams State Joe Vigil Men’s Coach of the Year

Kendra Foley Grand Valley State Doris Brown Heritage Women’s Athlete of the Year

Vincent Kiprop Missouri Southern Doug Watts Men’s Athlete of the Year

Al Carius North Central Men’s Coach of the Year

Amy Regan Stevens Institute Women’s Athlete of the Year

Ian LaMere UW-Platteville Men’s Athlete of the Year

ustfccca division iI

Jerry Baltes Grand Valley State Duane Vanderbusche Women’s Coach of the Year

ustfccca division iII

Bobby Van Allen Johns Hopkins Women’s Coach of the Year

62

techniques FEBRUARY 2017

NAIA

Laurier Primeau British Columbia Women’s Coach of the Year

Grier Gatlin Southern Oregon Men’s Coach of the Year

Aminat Olowora Oklahoma City Women’s Athlete of the Year

Jackson Thomas Bacone Men’s Athlete of the Year

NJCAA division I

Jim Robinson Lansing Women’s Coach of the Year

Paul Tavares Central Arizona Men’s Coach of the Year

Leanne Pompeani Iowa Central CC Women’s Athlete of the Year

Gilbert Kigen Central Arizona Men’s Athlete of the Year

NJCAA division IiI

Jim Macnider Harper Women’s Coach of the Year Men’s Coach of the Year

Ali Gutt Harper Women’s Athlete of the Year

Eric Wilkewitz Schoolcraft Men’s Athlete of the Year

High School

Jeff Messer Desert Vista High School (AZ) Girls Coach of the Year

Casey Jermyn Bozeman High School (MT) Boys Coach of the Year FEBRUARY 2017 techniques

63

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.