Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
I used to be one of these people who always thought about how much better an athlete might be if he could move more weight or if he was bigger and stronger. However, this doesnt take into account the qualities that the athlete needs to develop and how being able to lif t more weight maximally in the weight room may negatively af f ect other qualities. In most cases, athletes dont need to lif t maximally at high volumes to become stronger.
Now, I know a f ew people will play devils advocate and say Well, both you and I agree that athletes arent lif ters, so why should the f orm be perf ect? While I understand that athletes arent lif ters, the point here is that maximal attempts with bad f orm can open athletes up to injury. While I know that this may happen every once in a while when attempting a true max, it shouldnt happen all the time. Also, the minority of training would be perf ormed at true maximal intensities and coaches can always decide when to shut a player down. T his could be done when technical f laws are beginning to surf ace as opposed to a true max. Another consideration is the other stressors in the training load including sprints, jumps, throws, drills, and depending on the time of the year, practices. T here will always be some give or take in this area. Central nervous system intensive activity such as sprinting has a strong neurological ef f ect and athletes are able to produce a high amount of f orce in these types of movements. T his doesnt necessarily mean that high intensity strength training cant be perf ormed, but it may not be needed on a consistent basis. Also, in ref erence to lower body training, sprint and jump training provide a high intensity stimulus to the lower body in which true maximal strength work may not be necessary or may end up being counterproductive to the training process as a whole in sports that are alactic/aerobic. T he last consideration is the amount of maximal strength necessary. For certain sports, there isnt a need to display any great amount of f orce against large, external resistances. For these sports or positions, a greater level of explosive strength and high speed strength is of importance, which may not be developed by lif ting heavy weights slowly. For other sports, there isnt any need to display great amounts of f orce at any point. In this case, true maximal strength training may be a waste of time f or the athlete. While this seems like it should be common sense, there are some coaches or trainers out there who probably would have a racewalker (that weird sport in the Olympics where theyre penalized f or moving too quickly) perf orming maximal ef f ort work week in and week out and talking about the virtues of training the central nervous system when in reality it has no real carryover to the sport.
For an athlete who doesnt compete in a strength sport, volume in the weight room will always be inf luenced by what other components are being trained. T here isnt going to be a chart, program, set/rep scheme, or any other absolute when determining how much work an athlete should perf orm in the weight room. T he only absolute should be a consideration of the total amount of work. Keep in mind that adaptive reserves are f inite. Again, going back to an example of this, someone may look at a weight room workout on paper, see that there may only be one or two strength exercises being perf ormed, and think that it doesnt seem like very much volume. Many who look at programs with a lif ters mind may think that the athlete couldnt possibly get stronger. However, all high central nervous system intensive activity that may have been perf ormed on that day and that will be perf ormed later in the weekneeds to be considered. Because of this, there may not be a whole lot of time to include a f ull-f ledged lif ting workout. When looking at the amount of sprints, jumps, throws, f ull speed drills, and similar exercises, it becomes apparent that there is only so much lif ting that can be included. As f ar as how much volume is too much or too little, this is something that cant be decided by any one chart or source. Prilipens chart has been an old standby, but we need to consider that this was based on junior Olympic lif ters who werent necessarily practicing a sport, running, or jumping. Because of this, many times f ewer lif ts should be included in a workout than what is listed as optimal. While you can start with a high amount of volume and roll the dice as f ar as recovery and adaptation, it is a f ar smarter idea to be conservative and possibly low ball the volume of strength work to allow room f or progress. For an athlete who doesnt lif t as a sport, the weight room will always be only a component of becoming better. Will there be times when maximal strength may have an emphasis over other qualities? It really depends on the sport. We could take a sport like f ootball, which is traditionally viewed as having a need f or high levels of maximal strength. However, if we break down the sport by position, its easy to see that certain positions such as of f ensive and def ensive linemen will have a greater need f or maximal strength than their skill player counterparts. However, even in this case, it really doesnt matter how much weight they can squat, bench, or clean if theyre unskilled at the sport, constantly injured, unable to move, and so on. Even f or the players who need a level of strength, they also have to f ocus on a variety of other motor abilities. T hey might be able to lif t the house in the weight room, but this doesnt mean that they will be able to display this on the f ield. T here may be times of the year when slightly higher volumes of strength work are being perf ormed, but the strength coach should consider whether or not high volumes of weight room work are redundant or counterproductive. For athletes who engage in true sprint work at maximum velocity with appreciable volumes, large amounts of direct hamstring work may have a negative ef f ect on the ability to sprint or lead to sof t tissue injuries. In this case, the hamstrings are already being taxed to a great degree in the top speed work, so f urther taxing them with intense loading may be too much structurally. T his is one of the instances where it is important to f ocus on what not to do instead of attempting to do too much.
Many of these general weight room exercises arent always f orgiving to a large number of dif f erent leverages. Certain long-limbed individuals will be at a disadvantage f or movements like squats and benches. Others may be built in ways that arent best suited f or pulling or whatever other general exercise we want to consider. T his is why the main consideration needs to be the training ef f ect. As f ar as movements, at times, its best to just write in generalities because being stuck to one particular exercise may be an inef f icient use of time. Movements like sprints, jumps, medicine ball throws, and even specialized exercises may be more f orgiving to a certain population of athletes. In a question on the Q&A that I had to the T hinker a while back in ref erence to exercise selection, he stated that movement ef f iciency is the ultimate qualif ier f ollowed by selecting the loading parameters f or the desired training ef f ect that will still allow proper execution.
Remember that there is a time and a place to have a greater amount of work in the weight room. At other times, the weight room may have to take a back seat to other stressors that are at higher volumes. In the of f season, sprints or more specialized work f or the athletes sport may be the f ocal point. Weight room work will have to be conservative in either intensity or volume. At other times of the year, practice and competition may be the greatest stressor to take into account. Weight room work will be a supportive role and possibly may need to be regulated down a good bit to maintain perf ormance in the sport itself . 3. What is the desired training effect, and what is necessary to reach this effect? Draw up a list of movements that can help reach this goal. Def ine loading parameters f or each that will be directed toward the desired training ef f ect. Also, throw out whatever movements arent necessary and narrow down the list. 4. Of the movements listed, which ones are possible, useful, or appropriate for the athlete? While certain movements may be of use to the athlete, they may either not be possible due to injury or structural limitation or they might not be appropriate due to other prerequisites f or perf ormance. At this point, the list can be narrowed down f urther and choices that f it all three of the criteria can be made.
Conclusion
As coaches, it is important f or us to remember that the athletes we train arent powerlif ters, Olympic lif ters, or strongman. T hey are trying to develop skills in a sport that has its own set of perf ormance guidelines. Strength is only one of the motor abilities they may or may not need to be successf ul. T he weight room is only one tool that may be used to develop the various types of strength they need. Proper execution of exercise and loading parameters that reach the desired training ef f ect should always be considerations when programming f or athletes. Ill admit that Im a guy who in the past has def aulted to the weight room. While I like strength as much as the next person, it cant be the f ocal point at all times. Whatever is deemed possible, usef ul, and appropriate f or the athlete in relation to the end goal of the training process is what has to be considered. While some of the exercise selection can end up being dry or boring, it is all about perf ormance in the event or game that matters f or the athlete. Everything else is just one piece of the puzzle.
Related Articles
Training with Purpose: Programming T houghts and Considerations for the New Year Training with Purpose: Rebuilding Training with Purpose: Individualization