Introductions:
Lasnier David (DL): David is a physical trainer who leads the athletes in different sports. He works with a wide range of athletes in several sports including hockey, baseball, soccer and football at various levels who excel both amateur and professional. It is dedicated to helping athletes reach the next level by developing their strength, speed and foremost by reducing their risk of injury. David has been in coaching for performance for the past 7 years and has been involved in the preparation of several sports teams. He received his bachelor's degree in kinesiology from the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec. He currently works as a physical trainer at Endeavor Sports Performance in New Jersey.
Xavier Barbier (XB): Xavier is a physical trainer who earned a degree in sports science with a specialization in coaching and athletic performance. He also holds a diploma educator Federation federal French and American Football is a coach for ten years from various categories (flag, cadet, junior, senior) levels (D1, D2 and D3), camps (football camps and EFAJA IDF) and regional leagues. In addition, Xavier is the founder of Athletic Performance, a training firm performance in France for top athletes in three different sports, namely football, basketball and bike-Trial, including Gilles Coustellier, champion France, Europe and won the World Cup MTB-Trial. Between 2004 and 2009 he worked for Poles Hope football and basketball. In 2009, I also received the "quality label" from the Professional Association of Areas of Preparation and Physical Fitness.
Simon Deschenes (SD): Simon is a certified fitness trainer at the University of Sherbrooke with a specialization in coaching. He also studied at Concordia University in athletic therapy before transferring to Sherbrooke. He has a background of 13 years as a baseball player, 10 years in boxing and football in 11 years. He trained for 6 years under the leadership of Stéphane Dubé, former préparateur physique du Canadien de Montréal et des Penguins de Pittsburgh dans la LNH. Currently, he coached linebackers at Laval College Football Team Juvenile AAA.
Thank you all for having accepted my invitation to attend the round table on training performance. As a first matter, the planning concept of coaching is not neglecting sports in preparation for elite sports to allow the athlete to progress while making sure not to fall into overtraining. But in the classic periodization is recommended to start a program for beginners with aerobic and muscular endurance. Yet everyday, this may prove to have a negative impact on the development of the young athlete. David, I wonder if you could explain how this approach is not optimal.
(DL) First of all, thank you Xavier for the invitation! I would start by saying that I believe the conventional periodization, or linear, is not optimal for any athlete, whether a young beginner or a professional. With this type of periodization, within each phase, there results only a muscular quality to the time, even for energy systems. From experience it is very easy to see that this type of periodization has flaws, the biggest problem, in my opinion, is the fact that driving a single quality at a time, it is impossible to maintain the gains in previous phases. For example, none shall maintain any gains in force if the force phase is followed by a power phase, where it exercises only uses explosives with submaximal loads. Another problem in my opinion is that this type of periodization is originally designed for "peak" just before a major competition. I think, among others, in sports such as volleyball, tennis, speed skating and figure skating. When planning training for sports such as hockey, baseball and basketball seasons that have extremely long, the concept definitely does not do as well.
To return more specifically to the question of the young athlete and endurance training and aerobics, I think first of all that endurance training is not optimal for various reasons. When a young athlete begins to train, the main objective is to learn the basic movements and be able to apply them with good technique. For this reason, the gains at a young age will be much more order neuromuscular than anything else. I understand that the purpose of endurance for beginners is to avoid too heavy so they do not master the technique. By cons, what happens when you impose a large number of repetitions within a single run for a beginner? When muscle fatigue occurs (usually around 8-10 repetitions), the quality of motion becomes all absolutely atrocious. Beginners, young or not, lack the ability to maintain good technique under the influence of muscle fatigue.
And that is part of the aerobic (at risk of receiving emails to hate), I am totally opposed! Whether for a young athlete, older, a professional athlete or just someone who trains for fun, unless he practices an endurance sport (marathon, cycling, triathlon, etc..) I find the concept of aerobic training obsolete. This simply is not specific to any sport (except endurance), whether for a beginner or even a recovery phase. Defenders of aerobic endurance constantly emphasize the benefits: increased number of red blood cells, increasing the density of capillaries within the muscle, the ability to store more glycogen and increased VO2max. By cons, in my opinion, these are the risks associated with aerobic training that weigh much in the balance: the transition of power units to the characteristics of slow fibers, a decrease in the effectiveness of the stretch reflex in the muscle and a too large volume of repetitive in a limited range of motion. Taking this into consideration, I have no attraction to use aerobic training when trying to develop speed, power, strength and try to reduce the risk of injury.
According to what has been said by David, aerobic endurance training would have only a limited role to play in team sports. Because we support the majority of athletes in strength sports-speed, what are the different types of training development of energy systems that coaches can implement in order to optimize performance? Do I turn to athletics to get the desired results?
(XB) Before answering your question I want to congratulate you for this idea of round table and thank you for allowing me to share with stakeholders. Then I would like to acknowledge the excellent issue raised by your previous question and I could not agree more with David's response (this is also the risk of receiving emails to hate!). But back to your question.
I would say that there are 3 types of training for strength sports gear.
One is anaerobic efforts, that is to say short and intense efforts. In this case the effort should be 5 to 7 seconds and the recovery should be time between each effort. In order to maintain a good quality of movement and intensity should be important to maintain a low number of repetitions and sets.
The second type of training is that of duplication of effort possible. The effort is brief but according to each sport, we play on the recovery between each repetition to introduce the appearance of duplication of effort in the presence of fatigue. But we must be careful to use recoveries too short or too long at risk of not maintaining a good quality and intensity of execution or not result in good physical quality.
The last type of training is that of aerobic power, usually worked by intermittent efforts. However, as noted by David, the development of the aerobic is not a primary objective and training must be limited. However we can not hide his interest to maximize recovery between efforts possible.
Thus, practitioners of sports-speed force must spend most of their time training on the first two types of training.
I must then provide some details about the type of work. Depending on the sport and the sports period, it is possible to make these sessions a number of ways: stationary bike, racing, plyometrics, bodybuilding, weightlifting, etc.. This should match the demand of sport. However, I remain very still surprised when I see teams get ready with laps or field. We feel there has had any influence in the athletic physical training for many decades. Fortunately, we have made numerous advances in methods of physical preparation since!
It is sad that athletics remains the best solution for some to develop speed (new salvo of emails to hate!). What is athletics? This is the optimal application of biomechanics to solve the task required: accelerating from the blocks, reach maximum speed and maintain the momentum, all in a straight line. When analyzing the majority of sports, we find no starting blocks, the maximum speed and rarely run straight. However there are many changes of direction, deceleration and acceleration. It is many differences! Looking to the Athletics to get the desired results is not the right solution. In contrast, the right solution is to like athletics, that means working with an application of optimal biomechanics for acceleration, deceleration and the ability to change direction: posture, ground base, thrust angle, placing the center of gravity, arm action, leg action, management report amplitudes / frequencies of the steps, etc..
There is clearly an evolving techniques and training methods in recent years. What was once the standard is now analyzed more objectively from a different angle and often improved for the better. Take, for example training the trunk muscles and vision provided by Dr. Stuart McGill. However, there are often people who enter the gym, settled on the bench press for not making that muscle visible in the mirror. How is it possible to optimally prepare for our meeting and what should be, for example, a workout for a team sport athlete?
(SD) Gentlemen, before I begin, I tell you that it is a pleasure to share with you.
First, the run-up to a workout should begin with a warm-up. The purpose of this period is to prepare the body for the effort that we will require it. So we want to increase body temperature, facilitate oxygen transport and prepare the muscles and tendons in the effort to reduce the potential risk of injury. In addition, a proper warm-up will stimulate the central nervous system, which will accelerate the motor reactions with nerve impulses which will be accelerated. So all this will improve the coordination of the body during exercise.
It is recommended to divide the warm-up into three parts: self-massage, stretching, static light and finally mobility. The techniques of self-massage are varied. That either the stick or the popular foam roller, these instruments have the same goal of improving the quality of muscle tissue. This is helping to eliminate adhesions in the muscles tense and accelerate the blood of the targeted muscles. Static stretching in turn, helps the muscle to recover its entire length and to improve flexibility. Then there are the preparatory series. They can prepare themselves adequately to achieve the intended exercise. This is gradually go from a few sets and repetitions with lighter loads that we will use in our real series.
In regard to a typical session for a team sport, there are always several ways of seeing things. Personally, I separate the development of speed workouts. However, with studies on Post-Activation Potentiation, it is possible to combine the two and achieve excellent results.
With drives that I supervise a workout type would be built like this:
Warm
- Foam Roller
- Static stretching
- Mobility
Bodybuilding
- Series preparatory
- Multi-Joint Exercise / Weightlifting
- Exercise of muscles Accessories
- Training of trunk muscles (usually on days of upper body)
Labour metabolic
- Circuit with exercises fitness
- Sled pull / push
- Weighted carry
A session of speed development, in turn, would be constructed like this:
Warm
- Foam Roller
- Static stretching
- Mobility
- Dynamic Stretching
- Skip
main part
- Linear speed / direction change
As I mentioned earlier, the content and layout of the sessions can vary coaches.
In do week of training to performance, there are many views and philosophies of training that are specific to each coach. For example, when it comes time to train the muscle power, we see a clear separation in the methods used by stakeholders. Some follow the Westside method, others decide to use the weight lifting while some use plyometrics and medicine ball. What to do when faced with this decision?
(DL) I'll go a slightly more concise answer for this one! I would say there is no single clear answer. Several factors are considered, including the type of athlete, the sport, the equipment available, etc..
For athletes requiring rotational power in their sport, the medicinal use of balloons is logical and desirable. I think, among other things, hockey, baseball and tennis. That does not mean it is the only method to use either.
In terms of weightlifting, it is an extremely effective method for generating power. By cons, it's probably the one for which there is more stress. For example, with my baseball pitchers, I stay away from weightlifting because of the already high stress placed on the elbows and wrists by practicing their sport, weightlifting added stress on these joints, and if one considers the risks versus the benefits in this case, it's not worth the trouble. Another point to consider is that weightlifting is based on relatively complex movements that take some time to teach and learn. Depending on the total time spent with your athletes, the number of coaches available athlete and the training experience of your athletes, it is not always optimal.
Again, it comes to evaluating your situation, your athletes and apply the methods or the / most appropriate (s). I see each of these methods as a tool in a toolbox, where each of them are useful and can be used. It is good to good use time and there is absolutely no need to use one.
To revert to the evolution of coaching to performance, it is very difficult to ignore the work of Stuart McGill on the importance to train the abdominal muscles as a whole in order to prevent movement in the lumbar and transmit the forces of "core" to the ends. How can we summarize the new way to train, in full, the muscles that make up the trunk?
(XB) You're right. Even from France, it is very difficult to ignore the work of Stuart McGill on the lap belt. Historically, we know the importance of the latter to effectively transmit the forces. We had the right to "crunch" and other movements trained by interminable series (and boring). For cons, the work of Stuart McGill shed light on the dangers of imposing flexion, extension and rotation to our spine, the anatomical structure is not designed to withstand as much movement.
Thus, the training of the muscles of the trunk is rather thought to be able to support movement: anti-bending, anti-extension and anti-rotation. The lap belt should behave like a torsionally rigid. This responds to our two problems: optimizing the transmission of forces without endangering the spine. There are many exercises for this purpose, such as the classic "boards" and "bridge hips" or exercises with cables. In both cases it is possible to offer multiple variants to change the exercises to more complex situations. Sometimes, some athletes do not understand when they said, so this approach differs from what they have always heard. But less than 5 minutes of this type of work are enough to convince them that it is possible to work the core muscles without movement.
Simon, you've attended the last seminar of Mike Boyle ago few weeks in my company. Mike's presentation focused on the death of the back squat, why exclude the latter now in all its programs and why and how he now uses the drive unilateral or single-leg training. Can you enlighten us on why an athlete away from the back squat and turn to the "single-leg training"?
(SD) Mike Boyle has forsaken the back squat as a result of findings over 20 years experience in the field of drive performance. Often, his athletes had a sore back after days of squatting. He came to the fact that muscle fatigue in the lumbar spine when performing the squat brought the athlete to compensate by performing a lumbar extension is required to complete the movement. Combine that with a compression of the vertebrae was not optimal. He therefore substituted the back squat front squat, where the incidence of injury and discomfort were reduced but not eliminated. As his philosophy is that an injury is one too many, so he gradually abandoned in favor of the squat "single-leg training. As he himself said during his presentation at the seminar, it is certain that some of his athletes can squat safely. However, it had to come up with a system for all its athletes and non-treated case by case to avoid questions from customers for whom the squat is not optimal.
From anatomical point of view, everything changes when you stand on one leg. In fact, it is very rare during sports activities and the daily life of your legs just below itself. When one pays attention to different major sports movements, we see that everything happens mostly on one leg. So why not apply this statement in training? In addition, it will be to relieve the back. It should also be understood that the weakest link in the chain is the last post.
In addition, we also understand that we are stronger unilaterally. This is due to the so-called "bilateral deficit". Simply put, the sum of the charges raised one leg often exceeds the total raised in a motion with both legs (eg Bulgarian Split Squat vs Squat Front in the case of Mike Boyle). It seems that some kind of confusion when neural force on two legs.
is why an athlete should abandon or reduce the use of the squat and turn to unilateral movements that will bring much, if not better results in reducing the risk of injury.
In conclusion, I would like to thank David Lasnier, Xavier Barber and Simon Deschênes their participation and have taken care to provide answers with content of such high quality for all readers. I hope we have the chance to continue this experience in future roundtable.
Information:
David Lasnier: http://davidlasnier.com/
Xavier Barbier:
http://www.performanceathletique.com/ and http:/ / performanceathletique.blogspot.com /
Simon Deschênes:
http://www.facebook.com/ # / pages/Simer-performance/154660704581829
0 comments:
Post a Comment