Fundamental Principles of Training

With the start of the new IronEdge blog series, I thought it
would be appropriate to write about the fundamentals of training program
design. Займ безработным без проверки кредитной истории. With the volume of information available, it is easy for strength and
conditioning coaches to get caught up in a new training method or the latest technology
to hit the market and lose sight of the fundamental principles that underpin
the design of a training program.

Two overarching questions a strength and conditioning coach
should ask themselves when thinking about implementing a new training method or
incorporating new technology into their existing program: (i) What is the result
am I trying to achieve with my training program and will this method help me
obtain the objective? (ii) Does my training program adhere to the fundamental
principles of training? Or how does this new piece of technology help me as a
coach adhere to the fundamental principles of training with greater precision?

How do you know if
your training will elicit the adaptation you are trying to achieve?

For this you need to have a sound understanding of what I
refer to as the scientific pillars of strength and conditioning. It is
important to note that as strength and conditioning coaches we cannot expect to
be experts in each of the scientific disciplines that underpin our profession,
instead strength and conditioning coaches tend to be generalists across all of
the pillars.

Pillar I: Exercise
physiology – To prescribe training to an individual, a coach needs to
understand the stress that it is placing on the individual and how their body
will adapt to that specific stress.

Pillar II:
Biomechanics – If we alter the speed, body position and resistance used
in a movement how will that impact on the stress placed upon the individual.

Pillar III: Motor
Learning – As strength and conditioning coaches our job is to improve
an athlete’s performance on the field/court. A sound understanding of how the
movements we prescribe in a weight room environment transfer to movements the
athlete will be required to perform in their specific competitive context is
important for effective program design.

Pillar IV: Psychology – From a strength and conditioning coach context, sport psychology may involve an understanding of how to motivate an athlete so that they can compete and train to their full capacity. Ideally, each club would have a qualified sport psychologist as part of an interdisciplinary team to help all coaches however this is often not the case.

Pillar IV:
Pedagogy – Pedagogy is the
science of how knowledge and skills are exchanged in an educational
environment. As strength and conditioning coaches, this is the coalface of what
we do as a profession. We can think of the weightroom/court/field as a
classroom and our job as coaches is to impart our knowledge of physical
preparation to the athlete so they can be a better performer.

Does my training
adhere to the fundamental principles of training?

Developing strength and conditioning coaches may be looking
for a cookie-cutter training program, instead strength and conditioning coaches
should consider how a training program or method can be applied in the context
they are working within to the individual athlete they are working with.

• Progressive overload: Progressively increase the stimulus to provide an appropriate stress for the athlete to adapt to. When the stimulus is increased systematically and gradually, it becomes progressive. As strength and conditioning coaches we need to understand that our role extends beyond the weight room and we shouldn’t think about progressive overload strictly as adding more resistance to a certain movement. Instead, we can also look at providing a progressive overload through increasing the cognitive component (i.e. planned change of direction vs agility), or challenging the athletes skill / coordination (i.e. double leg plyometric activities with long contact times overloaded into single leg with shorter contact times).
• Specificity: Our top priority as strength and conditioning coaches is to improve the athlete’s performance in their sport. The principle of specificity can be adhered to from several standpoints: biomechanical specificity where training matches the force-velocity specificity of the target movement, energy system specificity where training matches the bioenergetic requirements of the competition, and coordination of movement specificity where training matches spatial and temporal requirements of the movement and performance context. Of course there are certain instances where training that is general in nature can be used and even transfer to performance. For instance younger or lesser trained individuals can be prescribed general training that will have a transfer to their performance. An example of this may be a young basketball player who wants to enhance their vertical jump performance, developing general lower-body strength through a squat pattern will transfer to greater jump height. However, if aiming to improve jump performance in an experienced basketball player with a decent training age, more specific training that requires greater intermuscular coordination such as plyometrics or resisted jumping is required for transfer to performance.
• Individualisation: Adherence to this principle is much easier said than done, especially when working in team sports. However, there are several individual factors strength and conditioning coaches should consider when designing a program for an athlete:
• Training background / training age
• Specific strengths and weaknesses
• Injury history
• Motivation
• Personality
• Playing position
• Recovery: When demonstrating the importance of recovery I like to refer to the below figure visually representing the “stimulus- fatigue-recovery-adaptation theory.” If as strength and conditioning coaches all we focus on is providing an optimal training stimulus we are only accounting for half of the equation that equals an improvement in performance. As research in the area of recovery is a hot topic in the industry, it is important that coaches read recent literature and listen to the experts in this area to ensure their recovery programs currently align with best practice guidelines.

• Reversal:
  When a training stimulus is removed, the adaptation will begin to regress
  towards baseline levels. The rate at which performance will decay is dependent
  upon several factors such as training history, type training that was being
  completed and the individual’s genetics.
• Variety:
  When should I change up my program? To continue to provide overload, a novel
  stimulus is needed. However, time must be given to allow adaptation. Finding a
  balance between consistency in your program which allows the athlete and yourself
  to observe improvements and changing it up to avoid staleness, is a struggle
  for many coaches. Some questions to think about regarding variety. If you
  change the program will you still be able to meet the primary training
  objectives for your session or microcycle? Is there a way that you can provide
  variation within your program with changing it completely?

In summary, it is far too easy to get lost in the complex
aspects of designing a training program. Sometimes we need to take a step back and
examine the program by its underpinning fundamental principles. From there we
can ensure the training we are delivering is best for the individual athlete in
their specific context to help them enhance their performance.