Q: Recently, I've noticed that I've lost a lot of mobility/flexibility that means I can't squat with my hands close in and with a high bar like I used to, I now have to go low bar and hands almost at the collars. What stretches/mobility work would you recommend to remedy this problem? I don't think this situation's very good for my shoulder health.
A: It's a common problem, and while the solution is pretty simple, it takes a dedicated effort to regular flexibility and soft tissue work. And, you're right that it isn't very good for shoulder health; that low-bar position can really wreak havoc on the long head of the biceps.
For starters, it's important to address thoracic spine mobility. If you're rounded over at the upper back, it'll be impossible to get the bar in the right "rack" position - regardless of what's going on with the shoulder itself. The first thing I do with folks in these situations is check to make sure that they aren't doing any sit-ups or crunches, which shorten the rectus abdominus and depress the rib cage, causing a more "hunchback" posture.
After you've eliminated these exercises from their programming, you can get to work on their thoracic spine mobility with drills from Optimal Shoulder Performance; one example would be thoracic extensions on the foam roller.
As you work to regain that mobility, it's valuable to build stability within that newly acquired range-of-motion (ROM) with loads of horizontal pulling (rows) and deadlift variations.
With respect to the shoulder itself, it's important to regain lost external rotation ROM and scapular posterior tilt. As I recently wrote in "The Right Way to Stretch the Pecs," I prefer the 1-arm doorway pec stretch and supine pec minor stretches. You can find videos of both HERE - and you can expedite the process with regular foam rolling on the pecs.
In the interim, substitute front squats, overhead squats, single-leg exercises, and deadlift variations to maintain a training effect.
As you progress back to squatting, you can ease the stress on your shoulders by going with a pinky-less grip in the short-term.
That said, for many individuals, the back squat set-up may not be appropriate. These include overhead throwing athletes, those with flexion-based back pain (e.g., disc herniations), and individuals with posterior labral tears.
I'd estimate that only about 25% of Cressey Performance clients do a true back squat, but that's influenced considerably by the fact that we deal with a ton of baseball players, and I get a lot of shoulder corrective exercise cases. Instead, we do a lot of work with the giant cambered bar and safety squat bar, in addition to front squatting.
Hopefully, these recommendations get you headed in the right direction and back to squatting as soon as possible!
What the experts are saying about The Truth About Unstable Surface Training...
"Unstable surface training is many times misunderstood and misinterpeted in both the physical therapy and athletic performance fields. The Truth About Unstable Surface Training e-book greatly clarifies where unstable surface training strategically fits into an overall program of injury prevention, warm-up/activation, and increasing whole body strength. If you are a physical therapist, athletic trainer, or strength training professional, The Truth About Unstable Surface Training gives you a massive amount of evidence-based ammunition for your treatment stockpile."
Shon Grosse PT, ATC, CSCS
Comprehensive Physical Therapy
Colmar, PA
Click here for more information on The Truth About Unstable Surface Training.
EricCressey.com Subscriber-Only Q&AQ: My question pertains to medicine ball workouts for pitchers. Are they only off-season training drills, or can I do them with my pitchers between starts? And, are there good ones for pitchers arms, in particular? I know you mentioned doing some one-arm drills with your pitchers.
A: It's safe to say that we probably do more medicine ball work than anyone on the planet. In fact, we've broken 17 medicine balls (16 featured in this photo) thus far this off-season.
Our destruction of medicine balls has been so epic that our equipment supplier actually asked us if we were throwing them against a wall with "jagged edges," as nobody had ever had similar problems, much less with as much regularity. So, suffice it to say that we hammer on medicine ball work a ton in the off-season, and the useful life of a ball around here is 4-6 weeks. But, I don't want to digress...
After the season ends, pitchers usually get a two-week break from anything that involves overhead throwing or rapid elbow extension after they are done throwing before we integrate any of this. Position players start right up with it. I think it's crucial to start up right away so that you can teach proper scap and hip loading so that guys will get the most out of it when the time comes to throw with more volume and complex exercises that help to maintain pitching-specific mobility, as Stanford-bound Sahil Bloom shows:
We typically go 3x/week medicine ball work with anywhere from 80 to 120 throws (never more than eight per set) per session from October through December (the last month overlaps with throwing programs where these guys are just tossing - nothing too challenging). This continues right up through spring training for all our position players. For pitchers, though, as January rolls around, we add in more bullpens and aggressive long tossing (and weighted balls, for some guys), and the medicine ball work drops off to two times a week with less volume and a more conservative exercise selection. This twice a week set-up goes right through Spring Training.
We always pair our medicine ball work with various mobilizations so that guys are addressing flexibility deficits instead of just standing around. It might be thoracic spine and hip mobility drills from Assess and Correct. Combining these mobilizations with all our medicine ball work, warm-ups, foam rolling/massage, and the static stretching programs guys are on, we have no concerns about pitchers "tightening up" with lifting. Blue Jays prospect Tim Collins doesn't seem to be all "muscle-bound" here, for instance:
I don't do a ton of medicine ball work in-season with my higher level guys; it's usually once every five days. A lot of the focus is on the non-dominant side. So, a right-handed pitcher would do more rotational stuff from the left side to keep as much symmetry as possible. With high school athletes, on the other hand, I see no reason why you can't use a slightly higher volume of medicine ball drills in-season. Kids are resilient and in many cases, undertrained, so there is always a big window of adaptation ahead of them.
With respect to the one-arm smaller medicine ball work, we use those two variations around this time of year. It's usually just two sets of eight reps right after throwing sessions twice a week. I like the idea of consolidating the stress with throwing outings. That said, there are some people that do them as warm-ups prior to throwing. Here, Atlanta Braves prospect Chad Rodgers demonstrates a few with a 1kg (2.2lb) ball.
As a random aside, off to the side in this video, you'll see how we tend to pair mobility/activation movements with power training, as Royals catching prospect Matt Morizio goes back and forth from clap push-ups to scapular wall slides.
This is really just the tip of the iceberg, so for more information, I would encourage you to check out our resource, Functional Stability Training; it is incredibly thorough, including plenty of options for both off- and in-season medicine ball work.
Enter your email below to subscribe to our FREE newsletter:
This might be surprising to some, as one would think that any sort of physical activity would benefit untrained elderly individuals. However, I wasn't surprised at the results at all, given all the research I'd done to prepare for The Truth About Unstable Surface Training. And, I wasn't surprised at all when I realized that this had significant parallels to how we train balancing proficiency in athletes.
It's important to understand first and foremost that balance and proprioception (and, therefore, stability at a certain point in time) are skill-specific. In particular, one must appreciate that static balance - which is typical of Tai Chi - is markedly difference from dynamic balance, which we encounter all the time in everyday life and in the world of athletics.
For proof, one mustn't look any further than when Drowatzky and Zuccato (1966) found little carryover from static to dynamic balance (1). Tsigilis et al. confirmed this finding 35 years later (2). And, it's one reason why I feel so strongly that we have to qualify our unstable surface training (UST) recommendations. UST necessitates a significant amount of static balance that may not transfer to sporting movements, which typically are more dependent on dynamic balancing proficiency.
From my e-book on the subject, "Previous research has demonstrated that scores on static balance tests are not useful information when attempting to predict inversion ankle injuries in soccer players (3). This lack of correlation implies that methods to improve static balance may not be effective training approaches to prevent injuries in dynamic sporting contexts - especially when dealing with athletes with no recent history of lower extremity injury."
Now, we know that we can't train complete specificity 100% of the time. Otherwise, in the elderly, we'd be trying to simulate every kind of fall that is possible. And, in a football player, for instance, we'd be trying to simulate every kind of tackle a running back could possibly encounter. So, what do we do? Once again, we look to the research!
In a study by Bruhn et al., a high-intensity strength training group actually outperformed the unstable surface training (static balance training) group on measures of static balance (4). In other words, one group trained static balance, and the other didn't - and the one who didn't train static balance directly actually improved the most overall. Maybe muscle cross-sectional area played into it? Maybe it occurred because of increased stabilization via enhanced intra- and intermuscular coordination that would allow for more rapid and effective force production (strength and rate of force development)? Maybe true specificity isn't as important as we thought?
1. DROWATZKY, J.N., AND F.C. ZUCCATO. Interrelationships between selected measures of static and dynamic balance. Res. Q. 38:(3) 509-510. 1966.
2. TSIGILIS, N., E. ZACHOPOULOU, T. MAVRIDIS. Evaluation of the specificity of selected dynamic balance tests. Percept Mot Skills. 92(3 Pt 1):827-33. 2001.
3. KONRADSEN, L. Factors Contributing to Chronic Ankle Instability: Kinesthesia and Joint Position Sense. J Athl Train. 37(4):381-385. 2002.
4. BRUHN, S., N. KULLMANN, AND A. GOLLHOFER. The effects of a sensorimotor training and a strength training on postural stabilisation, maximum isometric contraction and jump performance. Int J Sports Med. 25(1):56-60. 2004.
Sign-up Today for our FREE Newsletter and receive a deadlift technique tutorial!
Two weeks ago, I made it clear that a lot of folks were missing the boat with respect to baseball strength and conditioning by insisting that "plyos are all you need."
And, last week, I discussed how strength and reactive ability have interacted in some successful players in professional baseball, and how those qualities should dictate how an athlete trains.
This week, though, I'm going to throw you for a little loop and tell you that the static-spring continuum means absolutely NOTHING for a lot of athletes. Why?
You must first understand that each stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) activity involves three distinct phases:
1. eccentric (deceleration, preloading)
2. amortization (isometric, pause)
3. concentric (propulsion) phases.
As I discussed in great detail in The Truth About Unstable Surface Training, Komi (2003) outlined three fundamental conditions required for an effective SSC action (1):
1. "a well-timed preactivation of the muscles before the eccentric phase" [we need our muscles to be ready to go to decelerate]
2. "a short and fast eccentric phase" [deceleration has to occur quickly, as the faster the rate of stretch, the more energy the musculotendon complex stores]
3. "immediate transition (short delay) between stretch and shortening (concentric) phases." [if we spend too much time paused at the bottom, the stored energy is lost as heat instead of being used for subsequent force production]
So, what I'm really saying is that if you don't have a decent foundation of strength, training reactive ability - or even considering where you stand on the static-spring continuum - is a waste of time. Weak athletes need to have the strength (and rate of force development, for that matter) to decelerate with control in order to allow for fast eccentric and amoritization phases to occur.
I'd estimate that 60% of the young athletes who walk through my door on their first day to train are nowhere near strong enough to derive considerable benefit from "classic" plyos. Sure, they need to learn deceleration and landing mechanics and pick up some sprinting techniques, but the true progress comes from the resistance training they do.
Now, let's apply this to baseball, a sport where good strength and conditioning is still yet to be appreciated - and many athletes go directly from high school to the professional ranks without ever having touched a weight in their lives. As a result, many baseball athletes don't have the underlying strength to effectively make use of the reactive training that typifies the training presented to them.
And, in many cases, it will take a long time to get it during the season in the minor leagues, where they'll have competing demands (games, practice, travel) and limited equipment access. It's why I've seen several professional baseball players come my way with vertical jumps of less than 20". As a frame of reference, you need to be over 28.5" to be in the top 13 on my HIGH SCHOOL record board. Pro athletes? Really?
These guys can be conundrums from a training standpoint, as you have to realize that sprinting is possibly the single-most reactive/plyometric training drill there is; we are talking roughly four times body weight in ground reaction forces with each stride - and that's in single-leg stance. So, we have somewhat of an injury predisposition, but more important, it comes down to training economy. They aren't strong enough (relative to their body weight) to get much out of the sprinting, and would benefit more from strength training, bilateral jumping variations, and single-leg low hops. However, they need to jump and sprint as part of their profession, so we've got to prepare them for that as well.
All that in mind, the problem isn't traditional strength and conditioning, in my eyes. It builds a solid base of strength for many athletes and helps to increase body weight, which in itself is a predictive factor for velocity. However, the shortcomings of this S&C occur when coaches don't understand how to modify traditional strength and conditioning to suit the needs of the baseball athlete. And, problems kick in when folks don't appreciate that even just a little bit of strength goes a long way.
New Blog ContentRandom Friday Thoughts
Inverted Row IgnoranceMaximum Strength Feedback: 1/20/09Stuff You Should Read: 1/22/09
All the Best,
EC
References
1. Komi, PV. Stretch-shortening cycle. In: Strength and Power in Sport (2nd Ed.) P.V. Komi, ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003: 184-202.
Sign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive a Copy of the Exact Stretches
used by Cressey Performance Pitchers after they Throw!
In last week's newsletter, I observed that there are a lot of folks out there who think that weight training is unnecessary and plyometrics are sufficient for injury prevention and performance enhancement in pitchers. While a system like this might hold some merit in a population such as football where many athletes already have a large strength foundation, it doesn't work as well in a baseball population, which doesn't have that same foundation.
To illustrate my point, I'm going to touch on a concept - static-spring proficiency - that I covered at length in my Ultimate Off-Season Training Manual. Essentially, you have "static" athletes, "spring" athletes, and everything in between the two. You can use a series of performance tests and evaluate an athlete's training history to get an appreciation for where each athlete falls on this continuum.
"Static" athletes tend to have a good strength foundation - so much, in fact, that they tend to "muscle" everything. In other words, there is less efficient use of the stretch-shortening cycle to produce force. An example might be a powerlifter attempting to go out and play basketball. In order to improve, a "static" athlete needs to focus on improving reactive ability.
"Spring" athletes are great at using stored elastic energy in tendons to produce power. An example would be a basketball or volleyball player who has been jumping for years and years to develop spring, but without much attention to building the underlying strength needed to best use it. So, obviously, to improve, these athletes need to enhance muscular strength while maintaining their great elastic qualities.
Here's an excerpt from my Off-Season Manual that personifies this in the world of baseball:
"The modern era of baseball is a great example, as we've had several homerun hitters who have all been successful - albeit by very different means.
"At the 'spring' end of the continuum, we have hitters like Gary Sheffield and Vladimir Guerrero demonstrating incredible bat speed. The ball absolutely rockets off their bats; they aren't 'muscling' their homeruns at all. Doing a lot of extra training for bat speed would be overkill for these guys; they'll improve their power numbers by increasing maximal strength alone.
"At the other end of the spectrum, we have 'static' homerun hitters like Mark McGwire and Jeff Bagwell, both of whom were well known for taking weight training very seriously. These guys are the ones 'muscling' baseballs out of the ballpark; the ball almost seems to sit on the barrel of the bat for a split-second before they "flip it" 500 feet. Getting stronger might help these guys a bit, but getting more spring by focusing on bat speed with reactive training (e.g., plyometrics, sprinting, medicine ball throws, ballistic push-ups, etc.) would be a more sure-fire means to improvement.
"Then, we have the 'middle-of-the-road' guys like Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez. They possess an excellent blend of static and spring, so they need to train some of both to continue improving physically.
"Bonds is actually a good example of how an athlete's position on the static-spring continuum can change over the course of a career. When he started out, he was definitely a 'spring' guy, hitting most of his homeruns with pure bat speed. As Bonds' career progressed, his maximal strength improved due to neural adaptations and increased cross sectional area (more muscle mass).
"In light of the media attention surrounding the use of performance-enhancing substances in baseball, I should mention how he increased his muscle mass isn't the issue in question in the discussion at hand. The point is that he did increase muscle mass, which increased maximal strength, which favorably affected performance. The performance enhancing substances question really isn't of concern to this discussion."
Now, here's where it gets interesting - and where you get a bit more time to think about this.
Obviously, even to the most casual observer, not all baseball players are like Manny Ramirez, Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Jeff Bagwell, Gary Sheffield, and Vladimir Guerrero. This isn't rocket science; they are/were a heck of a lot more skilled and experienced than the overwhelming majority of the professional baseball world, and certainly all of the amateur ranks.
How are they different? And, why can't we just assume what might work for some of them will work for those aiming to reach the levels they've attained?
Well, you'll just have to think about that until Newsletter 141...
New Blog ContentRandom Friday ThoughtsSunday ThoughtsPush-ups for Baseball PlayersStuff You Should Read
All the Best,
EC
Sign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive a Copy of the Exact Stretches
used by Cressey Performance Pitchers after they Throw!
Free Teleseminar Series at SportsRehabExpert.com
I just wanted to give you all a heads-up on a great audio series - Sports Rehab to Sports Performance - that Joe Heiler has pulled together. I'll was interviewed on Friday, and Joe's also chatted will Mike Boyle, Gray Cook, Kyle Kiesel, Stuart McGill, Phil Plisky, Brett Jones, and Charlie Weingroff. The entire interview series is COMPLETELY FREE and begins airing later tomorrow night. You can get more information HERE.
Also, don't forget that the third annual Mike Boyle Strength & Conditioning Winter Seminar is fast approaching. For more information, click here.
Snowy Sunday Sentiments
Yesterday, in an email exchange I was having with some guys who are really "in the know" in the world of baseball pitching, one of them commented that pitchers need to start thinking more along the lines of training like Troy Polamalu of the Pittsburgh Steelers. In other words, less external loading, more pure-body weight drills, and a big focus on reactive ability (plyometrics drills, for the lay population).
I'll be the first to recognize Polamalu's accomplishments on the field - including an interception return for a touchdown yesterday. And, I admit that I don't know much about his training philosophy aside from what I have seen in 3-4 minute YouTube and NFL clips. So, I guess you could say that my point of contention is with what some folks take from viewing these clips, as was the case with this email exchange. So, I'll be very clear that I'm not criticizing the Sportslab philosophy; I'd love to buy these guys lunch and pick their brains, in fact.
However, I've got two cents to add - or maybe even three our four cents, depending on how poorly the American dollar is doing nowadays. I'm writing this on a snowy day in Massachusetts and I've got a little bit of extra time on my hands (a rarity during the baseball off-season for me).
I think that it is wrong to assume that weight training is unnecessary and plyometrics are sufficient for injury prevention and performance enhancement in pitchers. This is a common belief held among a large body of pitching coaches that I feel really needs to be addressed.
The fundamental problem I see is that a system that relies extensively on training elastic qualities. Or, in the terminology I like to use, it teaches an athlete to be more "spring," making better use of elastic energy from the tendons. This works best in an athlete who is largely static, or has a solid base of muscular strength.
Who would be a static athlete? Well, one example would be an athlete who gained a lot of strength in the previous four years...say, Troy Polamalu. He was a first-round draft pick out of USC, known for a good program under strength and conditioning coach Chris Carlisle. They've packed lots of muscle and strength on loads of high school guys over the years, no doubt. Polamalu may not realize it, but those four years of USC training probably set him up for the positive results he's seeing in this program - especially when you compare him to a good chunk of the NFL that now uses machine-based HIT training because they're afraid of weight-room injuries.
Basically, for the most part, only the freaky athletes make it to the "big dance" in football, so the S&C coach is responsibly for not hurting them. It's not much different in the world of baseball - but we're dealing with a MORE TRAINED population in the first place.
I'm sure that many of you have read Moneyball (and if you haven't, you should). One thing that they touch on over and over again is that high school draft picks don't pan out as well as college draft picks.
Sure, it has to do with facing better hitters and maturing another four years psychologically. However, one factor that nobody ever touches on is that these college draft picks have another four years of strength and conditioning under their belt in most cases. It may not be baseball-specific in many cases, but I would definitely argue that it's better than nothing. Strength goes a long way, but physiologically and psychologically.
And, that's what I want you to think about until my next newsletter comes out - when I'll get a bit more to the science of all this, and how it's been demonstrated in professional baseball.
New Blog ContentRandom Friday ThoughtsHow to Make an Exercise TougherAnother CP Intern on the Road to DieselFrozen Ankles, Ugly Squatting
Until next time, train hard and have fun.
EC
Sign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive a Copy of the Exact Stretches
used by Cressey Performance Pitchers after they Throw!
Q: After an injury and rehabilitation of a low back overuse/deadlifting injury, I’m finally able to deadlift and squat again. Only problem is that I am having a lot of trouble performing the deadlift correctly.
The problem is during my heavy sets, my lumbar spine starts to round early on in the pull. I’m not sure why this happening, but I’m almost positive it’s NOT due to a lack of mobility anywhere. I’m wondering if it may be an issue of having TOO much lumbar spine mobility and/or not enough core stability.
Or, maybe it’s an issue of my hamstrings being too weak and my lower back wanting to take over the pull too much. What do you think?
A: First off, I don’t think it’s as simple as “Muscle A is weak and Muscle B is tight, etc.”It has a lot more to do with you not having all the “ducks in a row” with respect to this particular movement pattern.There are a lot of people who have great stability and mobility who look awkward attempting a movement for the first time simply because it’s unfamiliar to them.
Just having good stability and mobility (which are context-specific, anyway) doesn’t imply that you can just immediately master a movement.Otherwise, we’d all be superior athletes from strength training and flexibility work without every having to practice the sports in which we want to excel!
More than anything, I suspect that your struggles are a matter of you trying to groove technique with weights that are too heavy (as noted by your “heavy sets” comment).Would you try to teach an elbows-tucked bench press technique with 275 if you knew a guy could bench press 300 with his elbows flared?No!He'd go right back to his "natural" movement pattern (the path of least resistance).
Technique work needs to be performed with submaximal weights, with the progression being:
1. multiple sets with few reps, controlled speed, light/moderate weights
2. multiple sets with few reps, FAST concentric, light/moderate weights
then...
3a. fewer sets with more reps, light/moderate weights
or
3b. few or multiple sets with few reps and heavier weights
I'm guessing that you're just going right to 3b – and that’s where the problems set in. Your body basically goes into panic mode. As an example, I'll throw myself under the bus. Here is a video of my best competition deadlift: 650 pounds at a body weight of 174.
Now, I know it might come as a surprise to some of you, but I don't lift 650 pounds all the time. In fact, I'd say that I deadlift over 600 approximately 5-6 times per year between training and competitions. This is why competition lifts are never really good measures of excellent technique; they are all essentially panic-mode (others have called it chaos training). You can bet that I'd never let an athlete of mine attempt any weight where his form came close to this; the risk:reward ratio is completely out of whack.
Also, as a tag-along to this, some people need to have a Step 0 where they actually do a different movement in order to progress to a main movement. In the context of the deadlift discussion, this might mean doing pull-throughs, trap bar deadlifts, or rack pulls to get the hang of the proper hip sequencing before moving down to the floor to pull with a conventional stance. Others might be better off leaving out deadlifts for the long haul, if a previous injury is significant enough to warrant it.
New Blog ContentRandom Friday ThoughtsTroubleshooting the Scapular Push-upTraining Four Days in a RowA Good Blog Worth Reading
All the Best,
EC
You probably noticed that the newsletter is a day late this week. I have been absolutely swamped with the goings-on at Cressey Performance on top of heading to a big baseball seminar in Houston this weekend (fly out Thursday night). Fortunately, though, this full schedule provided me with the idea for this newsletter.
With the chaos of the past week, I didn't have time to do my normal cooking and food prep for the week on Sunday night. So, Tuesday morning (had already had a normal breakfast), with about twenty minutes left before I needed to head out to work, I looked in the fridge in hopes of pulling together a few meals from a stir fry or casserole. Nothing was there.
As a result, I just wound up grabbing a half-empty tub of cottage cheese and added a tablespoon of psyllium husk powder for fiber. Later in the day, I'd add some Superfood and a scoop of low-carb Metabolic Drive, and had that concoction with a handful of almonds from the stash in the top drawer of the desk in my office. Another meal was a Metabolic Drive bar, and a third was simply a shake with Superfood and some Flameout (fish oil) and almonds. Obviously, it wasn't an ideal daytime meal plan - and it certainly wasn't an aesthetically-pleasing culinary masterpiece like you'd see in John Berardi's Gourmet Nutrition Cookbook, but it got me through the 8-10 hours.
I had a shake with my evening training session, and then came home to cook up a legitimate, whole food meal.
This certainly wasn't optimal, but it was a nutritional "out" for me: it got calories in, kept my energy levels up, and did so without blowing my diet with unhealthy convenience foods. Having good food easily accessible to me is huge when things get busy; I'll roll with mixed nuts, protein powders, protein bars (homemade and Biotest ones), Superfood, and beef jerky. We're also lucky to have a cafeteria in our building, and a good take-out place with awesome salads just about three miles down the road. So, in my eyes, there is never a reason for me to eat garbage - even if I haven't had time to cook up good stuff for myself.
Obviously, this can be applied to diet, but it also has applications in other facets of your healthy lifestyle.
From a training logistics standpoint, what happens if you walk in to your gym to squat, and find that the only squat rack is occupied and there is a long line waiting to use it. Do you stand in line, or do you go to trap bar deadlifts (option A) or walking dumbbell lunges (option B)?
Also along the training lines, but with more of injury perspective, what do you do if your shoulder starts acting up when you go to barbell bench press? Do you try to push through it, skip it altogether, or move to neutral grip dumbbell bench presses (option A) or a push-up variation (option B)? (As an aside, I just wrote an article covering these situations; check it out HERE)
How about professionally? If you're a trainer or a strength coach, if something stumped you, who do you contact? Have you built a good network of health care professionals with both general expertise and specializations? Case in point, one of my current clients started up with me in December of 2006, and he came to me with a C5-C6 disc hernation that had left him with numbness in the tip of his middle finger for the previous ten years - and none of the neurologists and physical therapists he'd seen could do anything about it. I introduced him to John Pallof, PT, COMT, and John had complete feeling back in his finger within two sessions from a combination of manual therapy and neural flossing.
Nowadays, John sees every neck issue that comes to Cressey Performance. Likewise, Dr. Bill Morgan sees all our significant wrist and elbow issues - and the list goes on and on. So, it's not just about having a network; it's about having a network of great people, some of whom specialize in certain areas. I had dinner with Dave Tate a while back, and I recall him saying that he was less concerned with knowing everything and more concerned with knowing who to call to find out everything. Dave was right on the money.
What about easily accessible resources? What books, DVDs, journals, and newsletters do you consult on a regular basis to stay on top of things and research new issues that cross your path? Improving your own abilities is just as important as expanding your network. If you haven't seen it already, a while back, I compiled a Recommended Resources page outlining my recommendations for both free websites and products you can use to stay ahead of the game.
At risk of sounding overconfident, I think that the Building the Efficient Athlete DVD set is something that every trainer and strength coach should watch, as it covers everything from functional anatomy, to static and dynamic assessments, to troubleshooting common resistance training technique mistakes.
Food for thought - and hopefully a little something for everyone.
The Proof is in the Pictures
I consider myself really lucky to have several clients who are, well, over-the-top adherent. These guys would eat dirt and do two hours straight of sled pushes if I told them that it'd make them leaner, stronger, and faster.
Now, a lot of these guys are up-and-coming baseball studs who dream of making it to the big leagues. Occasionally, though, we get a guy who is just nuts for the sake of being diesel - even if it won't benefit him financially or make him any more famous.
About six weeks ago, I used my weekly newsletter to highlight Warpspeed Fat Loss, a program from Mike Roussell and Alwyn Cosgrove that has yielded some excellent results since its introduction. I immediately received an email from one of the Cressey Performance masochists who couldn't wait to get a piece of the action.
An ex-Marine, Danny (age 35) now works in the financial investments realm at an internationally renowned firm. As I'm sure you can imagine, work has been pretty turbulent and hectic over the past two months for him in light of the troubles on Wall Street. However, to take things a few step further, he's married with a two-year old daughter, and his wife is expecting another child. So, we're not exactly talking about ideal conditions from a time management standpoint for approaching an extreme fat loss phase.
However, we're not exactly talking about a normal guy. Danny feeds his rotweiler grass-fed beef and fish oil. And, while we haven't confirmed it, the entire CP staff is pretty much convinced that he eats nails and craps lightning.
So, electric farts and all, Danny undertook the Warpspeed Fat Loss program, lifting TuThSa with us and doing intervals MoWeFr at 5:30AM on his own. I wrote the training, and he followed the diet to a "T" - thanks to his wife, who did all the cooking (jealous, fellas?). In 28 days, he went from 217.8 pounds to 205.6 pounds - but the pictures tell the entire story. The "befores" are on the left and the "afters" are on the right.
Now, my picture editing abilities leave a lot to be desired, but you get the point. Still, a lot of you are probably wondering what I'm getting at with this. Yes, Danny's diesel. Sure, Warpspeed Fat Loss is an awesome program - but I already told you about that a few weeks back. And, it can't be about me blowing sunshine up my own butt, as I just wrote the program and turned up the volume on the music; Danny did all the hard work. And, frankly, I don't really need to try to impress you guys, as you're already subscribed to my newsletter; chances are that you might be under the impression already that know what I'm doing!
In reality, the main points I'm going to make will come in a second newsletter later this week - so stay tuned...
For more information on the Warpspeed Fat Loss, CLICK HERE. I can't say enough great things about it.
In a blog last week, I discussed how important it is to differentiate between unstable surfaces and destabilizing torques applied further up the kinetic chain, as they comprise different kinds of instability training.
I receive a great question in response to the blog:
“Eric, what do you think about unstable surface training for hockey? I’ve been using half-dome stability balls for a long time now in many settings (high school through college) with my trainers. I can’t tell if the effect wouldn’t be the same if I were doing something else but skates do wobble under weak players when pivoting and stopping quickly under loads up to 2-3 times body weight, and ankles do adjust to become more stable after training like this. What’s your experience?Thanks, Boris”
It’s an interesting case, as the blade of a hockey skate is certainly different than regular flat surface.
Even more interestingly, though, is that Boris – through his question and also his personal experience – has directly highlighted some important research that was done in this regard.
In 2005, Behm et al. (1) examined the correlation between hockey skating speed and performance on a 30-second wobble board test.Interestingly, they found a significant correlation in players under the age of 19.However, no such correlation existed with players age 19 and older.So, how does this occur?
Here’s an analogy: go to a little league park, and find the kids who have the best fastball velocity.Chances are that they are also the kids who run the fastest, jump the highest, do the most chin-ups – or any other physical test that you throw at them.Very simply, this difference can easily be attributed to different levels of motor development in young skaters. Heck, with just a quick Google search for "youth hockey," I came across this picture.
You'll notice that the physical development is markedly different across the board. In fact, the 6-4, 230-pound goalie drove all the other 11-year-olds to the game, taught them how to shave, and then hit on all the hockey moms after the game at the local bar.
Moving back to the aforementioned Behm et al. study, the researchers noted, “The complex skills associated with skating would necessitate a more refined balance that would improve with maturity and perhaps training. Since skating is performed on a very small surface area (blade) in contact with a low friction surface, younger individuals with greater stability may have an advantage in executing the specific skating skills” (1).
So, in reality, we’re comparing physical development and not necessarily performance on a specific test – until we level the playing field and physical maturity is roughly equal for everyone (after the age of 18).At that point, you don’t see a correlation, so I’d be very reluctant to endorse lower-body unstable surface training as a useful training implement for hockey outside of specific rehabilitation situations.
Also, to take this a step further, I need to make a clarification with respect to this statement from the original question: "ankles do adjust to become more stable after training like this." This should actually be rephrased as "previously injured ankles do adjust to become more stability after training like this." The truth is that nobody has really verified the incremental benefit of such training in healthy ankles (read: no previous history of injury) with a truly functional outcome measure.
The long-term studies examining the issue have been poorly controlled in the sense that they've looked at ankle sprains over the course of an extended period of time with an unstable surface training intervention, but haven't taken into account previous history of injury. So, the athletes engaged in the unstable surface training group may simply have been rehabilitating previous ankle injuries with longstanding functional deficits rather than "fortifying" already healthy ankles to prevent injuries. Interestingly, in one study of elite female soccer players, balance board training did not decrease the rate of traumatic lower extremity injuries. The frequency of major injuries - including four of five anterior cruciate ligament tears - was actually higher in the intervention (unstable surface training) group than the control group (2).
1. Behm, DG, Wahl, MJ, Button, DC, Power, KE, and Anderson, KG. Relationship between hockey skating speed and selected performance measures. J Strength Cond Res. 19(2):326-31. 2005.
2. Soderman, K, Werner, S, Pietila, K, Engstrong, B, and Andredson, H. Balance board training: prevention of traumatic injuries of the lower extremities in female soccer players: a prospective randomized intervention study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 8(6):356-63. 2000.
New Blog ContentRandom Friday ThoughtsUnstable Ground or Destabilizing TorquesBuilt for Show
That'll do it for this newsletter.
All the Best,
EC
