Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
[Back to Contents]
Page 1
Conversely
Internal vs. external cues: science, theory, & practical
application.
By Jordan Syatt
____________________________________________________
An Introduction to Coaching Cues
An overwhelming amount of attention has recently been directed
towards the science & application of coaching cues and,
specifically, their impact on markers of performance.
Seemingly arbitrary nuances in word choice, research both
experimental and anecdotal is consistently finding reason to
believe some cues are more effective than others.
Specifically, external cues have consistently proven to be more
effective than internal cues at improving performance through a
variety of mechanisms such as decreased antagonistic muscular
co-contraction, improved full-body coordination, and enhanced
reflexive movement efficiency.1-10
As a result, it is now common among strength coaches to tout an
external focus as the end-all-be-all of coaching cues while
ostracizing an internal focus by deeming it a useless waste of
time.
External Focus Cues direct the athlete to think about how their
body moves in relation to the environment. For example, during
the squat, commonly used external cues are:
Show me the logo on your shirt! (in place of the chest
up cue)
Spread the floor apart!
Drive the floor away!
Whats the Difference? The fundamental difference between
internal and external focus cues lies in where the athlete focuses
their attention. With internal cues, the athlete directs their
attention towards their own body in an attempt to complete the
movement. With external cues, however, the athlete directs their
attention towards their environment and the subsequent
movement effect.
Reviewing the Literature
When the goal is to improve performance in a given movement,
external focus cues are unquestionably better than those with an
internal focus. Period. End of story.
Whether the movement is a maximal effort squat, long jump,
basketball free throw, golf swing, or even throwing
dartsexternal cues are the superior coaching tool. 1, 7, 12, 13, 14
As you can see, each of these cues cause the athlete to think
about how theyre creating movement in relation to their body.
[Back to Contents]
Page 2
[Back to Contents]
Page 3
My Personal Experience
Im a science guy. I understand and appreciate the importance of
research as well as the implications it holds in real-world
performance.
I say this, not to brag, but to let you know from where the
following information is coming. Im not some random desk
jockey sitting in my dark and creepy basement trolling on
Reddit. I lift. I coach people to lift. And I do this every single
day. Thus, Im excited to share with you my personal
observations from experimenting with internal and external
focus cues.
There is a major difference between performance and practice.
If theres one thing you take from this article, let it be this:
performance and practice are two entirely separate entities and
should be treated as such. Allow me to explain.
Lets say youre competing in a powerlifitng meet and youre
about to take your 3rd and final squat attempt. This is a
performance. You will use the strength and skills acquired
during recent months of training in an attempt to perform your
best. This is NOT the time to change your technique.
Conversely, during the months leading up to the meet you are
practicing. You are practicing the movement, making
alterations, and tweaking things to find what works best for you.
See the difference?
The main goal of practice is to engrain the optimal movement
pattern so when it comes time to perform the movement you
dont think you just do.
Which Cues are Best for Practice and Performance?
Performance (i.e. competition) is the ideal time to utilize
external cues. The well-established benefits of external cues are
most valuable at this time as they facilitate the best execution of
a pre-learned movement.
[Back to Contents]
Page 4
Coaching
Activation
Page 5
Per usual, the answer lies in a clear understanding of the fact that
there isnt an innately optimal coaching cue. To recap,
external cues are unquestionably better at improving specific
movement performance. Whether youre competing in
powerlifting, football, baseball, basketball, golf, darts, or any
other athletic and/or skill-related activity, external cues will help
you perform pre-learned movements in the most efficient
manner.
Internal cues, on the other hand, are better at improving
specified muscular activation which may be of greater benefit in
a variety of settings such as rehabilitation and hypertrophyfocused programs.
Practically speaking, a combination of both internal and external
focus cues is likely more effective than either one alone.
Regardless of whether youre working with a large client
population or simply coaching yourself, remember to
incorporate both internal and external cues to find what works
best for the individual in question.
Never Minimal. Never Maximal. Always Optimal.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
-J
___________________________________________________
Jordan Syatt is a strength training &
nutrition consultant and an IPA world
record powerlifter. He is Precision
Nutrition and Westside Barbell Certified,
has a B.S. in Health & Behavioral
Science, and is the owner of
www.syattfitness.com. Fitness aside,
Jordan is an avid traveler, selfproclaimed nerd, and unashamed of his
obsession with the Harry Potter series.
____________________________________________________
15.
16.
17.
18.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
[Back to Contents]
Page 6
Study strengths
This study is innovative since its the first to ever examine the
long-term effects of ketogenic diet on training adaptations and
exercise performance in trained endurance athletes (in this case,
competitive off-road cyclists with a minimum of 5 years training
experience and a minimum VO2max of 55 ml/kg.min). Diets in
both conditions were designed by a dietitian, and the nutritional
specifics of each (targeted) diet were reported in detail, including
fatty acid types.
This endurance performance-enhancing capability a lowcarb/high-fat diet has been equivocal, and thus controversial,1
especially for high-intensity bouts. The most recent example
aside from the present study is Lima-Silva et als finding that
compared to a 70% CHO diet for 48 hours, a 25% CHO diet
lowered performance and total aerobic energy provision during
supramaximal exercise.2 Prior to that, Havemann et al found that
a 6-day high-fat diet (68% of total energy) followed by 1 day of
carb-loading (8-10 g/kg) lowered sprint power output compared
to a high-carb diet (68% of total energy).3 Prior to that, a review
by Phinney4 reported a similar phenomenon, stating that the
sprinting capability of his subjects on a ketogenic diet in an
earlier study5 remained constrained during the period of
carbohydrate restriction. This consistency of research showing
detrimental effects of low-carbohydrate dieting on high-intensity
work casts a strong shadow of caution against the presumption
that this diet would maximize endurance race performance, and
certainly performance in sports involving more even mix of
moderate and high intensities.
[Back to Contents]
Study limitations
Page 7
My commentary
[Back to Contents]
Page 8
The main finding was that the diet beverage group lost 1.85 kg
more weight than the water group, and this difference was
[Back to Contents]
Comment/application
Page 9
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
[Back to Contents]
Page 10
By Armi Legge
____________________________________________________
Specific.
Measurable.
Actionable.
Realistic.
Time-Bound.
You write your goal on a piece of paper and tape it to your
fridge.
You setup a workout and nutrition plan to reach your goal. You
visualize your new body, with veins, abs, and popping muscles.
You think of how good it will feel to take your shirt off at the
pool.
Example: You feel like once you get lean, everything else
will be easier. Youll get more done at work, have more
success with the opposite sex, and have the confidence to
pursue your other goals. You feel like once you reach your
goal, then youll be happy, fulfilled, or accomplished but
youre still not good enough yet.
You follow your plan for a few weeks. You look forward to
every workout. You go to bed on time. You follow your diet
plan exactly.
The truth is that once you get lean, you just stop worrying about
getting lean it doesnt make the rest of your life easier.
Sometimes getting lean makes life worse.
But over time, your motivation wanes. You cut workouts short.
You stop following your meal plan. You stay up watching T.V.
and surfing Facebook.
Im not saying weight loss goals are bad, but theyre overrated,
incomplete, and sometimes counterproductive.
Eventually, you stop losing weight. And then you give up.
Thats how most diets end1,2 even for educated, motivated
people, like you.*
Most people set goals and then figure out a system to achieve
them. Thats ass-backwards.
If you want to lose weight, focus on the system, then your goals.
What happened?
You dont lack motivation, and you may be following a great
plan. The real problem was your goal.
Why most weight loss goals dont work.
Studies have shown that people who set goals tend to lose more
weight and keep it off longer.3,4
[Back to Contents]
Page 11
Heres an example.
Sarah is about 20 pounds overweight, but she loves exercise. She
lifts weights four times per week, goes hiking on the weekends,
and rides her bike to and from work. She prepares almost all of
her meals at home, mostly from whole plants and animals. Sarah
wants to lose those 20 pounds, so she sets a goal weight of 110
pounds.
John has just finished college, and trains with his buddies
whenever its convenient. His schedule is flexible, so he works
out a lot. He eats most of his meals at restaurants, the only dish
he knows how to make is scrambled eggs, and he changes his
sleep schedule constantly.
John wants to prepare for his first bodybuilding show in a year.
Hes tried to get lean in the past, but he always rebounded and
binged. He still binges occasionally, but since hes bulking he
doesnt worry about it.
As a young guy, John doesnt have to work that hard to stay at
12% body fat. But he desperately wants to get down to 5%.
He creates a set of calorie and macronutrient guidelines, weighs
all of his food, adds more cardio, and stops hanging out with his
friends so he can focus on his diet. He sets weight benchmarks to
make sure hes on track for his competition.
On paper, John is much closer to his goal body than Sarah. But
thats not what matters.
How much do you think Sarah will need to change her lifestyle
to lose weight? Almost none. If shes a little more diligent about
her food intake, shell easily shed fat and probably keep it off
forever.
___________________________________________________
1.
He might reach his goal weight before Sarah, but what then? He
has no system for maintaining it, and hes probably going to
rebound up to a higher weight after hes ripped. Thats assuming
he can get his binge eating under control and get lean.
2.
Sarah focused on her lifestyle first, and then set a weight loss
goal. John did the opposite.
4.
References
3.
5.
6.
7.
[Back to Contents]
Page 12
In the following discussion, Ill dig into what I feel are the main
elements that keep the calories in/calories-out (CICO) and antiCICO camps at war.
Straw men & false dichotomies
The underlying message of the video was that calories dont
matter as long as they arent carbohydrate calories. This is the
typical war cry of folks who have bought into the dogma that
carbohydrate intake is the prime culprit in the modern obesity
epidemic. A common thread among low-carb diet proponents is
a passionate dismissal of the CICO model of weight loss. A
calorie is NOT a calorie! they scream. What they mean is that
the macronutrients, as well as the foods that contain them, do not
have identical metabolic effects. Heres the irony: no one in the
CICO camp disputes that.
The anti-CICO camp is under the false presumption that their
opponents believe that the macronutrient composition of the diet
has no impact on body weight or body composition. Of course
this is absurd, given the well-established differences between
macronutrients in terms of metabolic and hormonal (thus
behavioral & appetite-regulating) effects. The anti-CICO camp
is also assumes that CICO proponents ignore diet quality. On the
contrary, I have not met a single CICO proponent who thinks
Alan Aragons Research Review June 2014
that diet quality doesnt matter for long-term health. Making the
leap toward thinking CICO folks completely dismiss the variable
effects of the macronutrients is likely due to the normal human
tendency to think in black-white terms. Speaking of which, its
very common for low-carb diet proponents to issue a false
dichotomy. Specifically, they present their case as if there are
only two choices that can be made: an Atkins-type diet, or some
variant of the Standard American Diet (SAD), which is
characterized by a high intake of fast food and refined
carbohydrates, among other things that are actually shared by the
Atkins model (i.e., a high intake of saturated fat).1 So, in the
eyes of the zealots, its either low-carb or high-crap, with no
other choices in-between. This type of false/binary thought is far
too common among preachers of the low-carb gospel.
Blatant denial of the evidence
Ill open this section with an excerpt from Wu et al in one of the
most diligent review papers Ive read in recent years:2
Data from meta-analyses of dietary intervention trials suggest
that some weight-loss diets, such as low-carbohydrate diets,
low-GI/GL diets, and the Mediterranean diet, might be
alternatives to conventional low-fat diets, especially for shortterm weight loss, but have great variability of long-term effects.
Moreover, the difference in weight loss among these diets is
only 1-2 kg or less, which appears to be of little clinical
significance. Thus, overweight and obese people can choose
many different weight-loss diets on the basis of their personal
preferences.
Page 13
Page 14
References
1. Hsu TM1, Kanoski SE2. Blood-brain barrier disruption:
mechanistic links between Western diet consumption and
dementia. Front Aging Neurosci. 2014 May 9;6:88.
[PubMed]
2. Wu H, Wylie-Rosett J, Qi Q. Dietary Interventions for
Weight Loss and Maintenance: Preference or Genetic
Personalization? Curr Nutr Rep. 2013 Dec;2(4):189-98.
[Springer Link]
3. Bueno NB, de Melo IS, de Oliveira SL, da Rocha Ataide T.
Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for
long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised
controlled trials. Br J Nutr. 2013 Oct;110(7):1178-87.
[PubMed]
4. Soenen S, Bonomi AG, Lemmens SG, Scholte J, Thijssen
MA, van Berkum F, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. Relatively
high-protein or 'low-carb' energy-restricted diets for body
weight loss and body weight maintenance? Physiol Behav.
2012 Oct 10;107(3):374-80. [PubMed]
5. Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD, White A, Hutchins H,
Sears B. Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic
advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets. Am J
Clin Nutr. 2006 May;83(5):1055-61. [PubMed]
6. Colpo A. Table 1, Chapter 1, in: The Fat Loss Bible. Selfpublished, 2012. [Amazon]
7. Nutrition Science Initiative. Review of the literature, 2012.
[NuSI]
8. Stimson RH, Johnstone AM, Homer NZ, Wake DJ, Morton
NM, Andrew R, Lobley GE, Walker BR. Dietary
macronutrient
content
alters
cortisol
metabolism
independently of body weight changes in obese men. J Clin
Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Nov;92(11):4480-4. [PubMed]
9. Berg JM, Tymoczko JL, Stryer L. Section 16.3Glucose Can
Be Synthesized from Noncarbohydrate Precursors. In:
Biochemistry. 5th edition. New York: W H Freeman; 2002.
[NCBI Bookshelf]
10. Levine JA, Eberhardt NL, Jensen MD.. Role of nonexercise
activity thermogenesis in resistance to fat gain in humans.
Science. 1999 Jan 8;283(5399):212-4. [PubMed]
11. Levine JA, Vander Weg MW, Hill JO, Klesges RC. Nonexercise activity thermogenesis: the crouching tiger hidden
dragon of societal weight gain. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc
Biol. 2006 Apr;26(4):729-36. [PubMed]
12. Antonio J, Peacock CA, Ellerbroek A, Fromhoff B, Silver T.
The effects of consuming a high protein diet (4.4 g/kg/d) on
body composition in resistance-trained individuals. J Int Soc
Sports Nutr. 2014 May 12;11:19. [PubMed]
13. Kristensen M, Jensen MG, Aarestrup J, Petersen KE,
Sndergaard L, Mikkelsen MS, Astrup A. Flaxseed dietary
fibers lower cholesterol and increase fecal fat excretion, but
magnitude of effect depend on food type. Nutr Metab (Lond).
2012 Feb 3;9:8. [PubMed]
14. Binks M. Judge the science, not the funding source. Int J
Obes (Lond). 2014 May;38(5):625. [PubMed]
[Back to Contents]
Page 15
[Back to Contents]
Page 16