Troubles with RSA

I was just finishing reading great review paper(s) on Repeated-Sprint-Ability by Girard, Bishop and Mendez-Villanueva.

Girard O, Mendez-Villanueva A, Bishop D. Repeated-sprint ability - part I: factors contributing to fatigue. Sports Med. 2011 Aug 1;41(8):673-94.

Bishop D, Girard O, Mendez-Villanueva A. Repeated-Sprint Ability - Part II: Recommendations for Training. Sports Med. 2011 Sep 1;41(9):741-56.

Me reading the studies during my day off...  I always pay attention to RSA :)

 
Mentioned papers are great up-to-date review of the current knowledge on RSA testing and training. Here are some quotes from the papers:

For example, the limited evidence to date suggests that, compared with repeated- or intermittent-sprint training, interval training produces superior increases in both βm_{in vitro}  [27] and Na+/K+ pump isoform content.[12] With respect to RSA, repeated-sprint training has been reported to produce greater improvements in best sprint time[12,27,96] and mean sprint time,[4,12,27,96] compared with interval-based training. In contrast, interval training appears to be superior to repeated-sprint training to decrease (i.e. improve) the sprint decrement score (or the fatigue index).[12,27] However, due to the problems associated with interpreting changes in the sprint decrement score when there are concurrent changes in best sprint time,[102] it is difficult to make universal recommendations.

Thus, it appears that while interval training may be superior at minimizing the decrement during repeated sprints (possibly due to greater physiological adaptations, as outlined in section 2),  intermittent- or repeated-sprint training is superior at improving the performance of individual sprints. As a result, the combination of  the two (i.e. repeated-sprint training to improve sprint performance plus interval training to improve the recovery between sprints) may be the best strategy to improve RSA. Further research is required to investigate the optimal volume and duration of a repeated-sprint training macro cycle, as anecdotal evidence suggests that too much repeated-sprint training is stressful and may lead to decreases in RSA.

Despite the obvious need of more research in this area, these results seem to confirm that in well trained team-sport athletes, maximization of mean repeated-sprint time is linked to improvements in single-sprint performance.[33]

This review has highlighted that there is not one type of training that can be recommended to best improve RSA and all of the factors believed to be responsible for performance decrements during repeated-sprint tasks

While different training strategies can be used in order to improve each of these potential limiting factors, and in turn RSA, the concurrent implementation of different forms of training may be the best strategy to improve RSA

Nonetheless, two key recommendations can be made based on the existing literature as follows:

1. It is important to include some training to improve single-sprint performance. This should include (i) specific sprint training; (ii) strength/power training; and (iii) occasional high-intensity(>VO2max) training (e.g. repeated, 30-second, allout efforts separated by ~10 minutes of recovery) to increase the anaerobic capacity.

2. It is also important to include some interval training to best improve the ability to recover between sprints (if the goal is to improve fatigue resistance). High-intensity (80–90% VO2max) interval training, interspersed with rest periods (e.g.1 minute) that are shorter than the work periods (e.g. 2 minutes) is efficient at improving the ability to recover between sprints by increasing aerobic fitness (VO2max and the lactate threshold), the rate of phosphocreatine resynthesis and βm_{in vitro}

What I wanted to rant about in this blog entry are not the training implications (which are mentioned in the quotes above, but I will deal with them in another blog entry), but rather assessment and evaluation of RSA performance. What is better and what is worse? How do we evaluate the RSA performance?

There are couple of methods to evaluate the RSA performance. Suppose we have an athlete that did 5x30m runs with 25sec jog back recovery. His times are as follows:

Sprint Athlete A 1 4,7 2 4,7 3 4,75 4 4,8 5 4,82 Total time 23,77 Average 4,754 Best 4,7 Worst 4,82 FI (%) 2,49% Sdec (%) 1,15%

 

From the mentioned data we are going to calculate Total Time (basic sum of all sprints), Average Time, Fatigue Index (FI) and Percentage Decrement Score (S_dec). If you are interested how is this calculated please check the mentioned papers, but to understand what I want to argue you don’t basicaly need to know.

So, this Athlete A shows certain pattern of fatigue (shown by FI and S_dec) as the sprints repeat. Let’s introduce Athlete B. 

Sprint Athlete A Athlete B 1 4,7 4,77 2 4,7 4,77 3 4,75 4,77 4 4,8 4,77 5 4,82 4,77 Total time 23,77 23,85 Average 4,754 4,77 Best 4,7 4,77 Worst 4,82 4,77 FI (%) 2,49% 0,00% Sdec (%) 1,15% 0,00%

            What we can see in the case of Athlete B is that he has great ability to repeat the sprints without fatigue (as shown by zero score in his FI and S_dec ). His first sprint was slower, but he maintained it across sprints.

            Let me introduce Athlete C.

Sprint Athlete A Athlete B Athlete C 1 4,7 4,77 4,3 2 4,7 4,77 4,4 3 4,75 4,77 4,5 4 4,8 4,77 4,6 5 4,82 4,77 4,7 Total time 23,77 23,85 22,5 Average 4,754 4,77 4,5 Best 4,7 4,77 4,3 Worst 4,82 4,77 4,7 FI (%) 2,49% 0,00% 8,51% Sdec (%) 1,15% 0,00% 4,65%

            The Athlete C has the fastest first sprint, but he fatigues as hell across the sprints (as shown by his FI and S_dec ). 

Now the main question: Who has better Repeated-Sprint-Ability? Athlete A, B or C? Who would you like in your team? If this is all one athlete, would you like his RSA progress from A to B, or from A to C over time? Why?

            If we take FI and  S_dec as an indice of RSA ability, then Athlete B would be our best bet. But hell, he has „Repeated-Slow-Ability“ (TM) as my brother-in-arms Carl Valle would say. He is slow as hell. Look at his average and total time – they are worst from the three.

           

            Let me tell you straight. I would choose Athlete C to be in my team. His first sprint is way better than of other two, his total time is better, his average time is better. His last sprint is faster than first sprints of other two guys, even if his FI and S_dec  are worst.

            So what is a indicator of RSA? Ability to recover between slow sprints? Ability to repeat crap power output? I see a lot of athletes and their coaches with crap power output and speed/acceleration working on their RSA. What exactly do they want to be able to repeat? Repeated-Slow-Ability?

            The point being taken here is that we need to see the whole picture. Usual indicator of RSA are FI and S_dec , but hopefully you now see they don’t tell the whole story. If the Athlete C improve both FI and S_dec over time, his RSA will improve. But we cannot compare athletes solely based on FI and S_dec without taking Total Time, Best time and Average into account as well. Just compare Athlete B and Athlete C.

            Now return to the quotes from the article one more time. Especially this one:

Despite the obvious need of more research in this area, these results seem to confirm that in well trained team-sport athletes, maximization of mean repeated-sprint time is linked to improvements in single-sprint performance.[33]

            So, me as a coach want a freaking powerful and quick athlete that is able to produce great single-sprint performance FIRST before I start to be concerned with his RSA. A lot of soccer coaches work on RSA performance, but look at those sprint numbers. They are CRAP. I don’t want my athletes have great FI and S_dec and crap first sprint. I want them to be more like an Athlete C. I will deal with RSA later.

            Regarding training, please read the quotes again. Certain pattern emerges (as sumarized in the last quote) – interval training seems to improve FI and S_dec(recovery between sprints), while repeated-sprint training seems to improve performance of individual sprints (and as concesquence Total Time and Average Time). But what is the latter RSA training is changed for real speed/power training? Would it yield better effects on RSA indices?

To date, we are unaware of research that has investigated the influence of ‘traditional’ sprint

training on RSA. However, it is possible that such training may produce even better improvements in both best sprint time and mean sprint time,[86] and further research is warranted

            Well, maybe we have pushed RSA training drills way over the border. Maybe we don’t need to do more that occasional RSA training sessions („..as anecdotal evidence suggests that too much repeated-sprint training is stressful and may lead to decreases in RSA”) if we do quality strength, power, speed and interval (VO_2max) training session?  Maybe RSA (training) is over-rated? 

Sharpening the Saw

Just a quick blog entry today. I have just found another great analogy for a training situation I encounter very frequently. The analogy comes from 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey. Although I found a  lot of good analogies for training situations/problems in this a must read book (one I usually use is Production~Production Capacity), this one is about Sharpening the Saw.

Sharpen the Saw

Here is how the story goes

A man was struggling in the woods to saw down a tree. An old farmer came by, watched for a while, then quietly said, “What are you doing?”

“Can’t you see?” the man impatiently replied, “I’m sawing down this tree.”

“You look exhausted,” said the farmer. “How long have you been at it?”

“Over five hours, and I’m beat,” replied the man. “This is hard work.”

“That saw looks pretty dull,” said the farmer. “Why don’t you take a break for a few minutes and sharpen it? I’m sure it would go a lot faster.”

“I don’t have time to sharpen the saw,” the man says emphatically. “I’m too busy sawing!”

This particular 'habit' (or principle) can be used in a lot of situations, but one that is particularly frustrating to me is training during the in-season.

Me: The guys need to do strength training
Coach: Squats?
Me: Yes, heavy squats. They need to keep doing them
Coach: But Mladen, we have a game on Saturday. I want them to be fresh
Me: I understand, but if we stop doing strength training they will de-train.  The game is the priority, but we need to keep training.

Coaches that joined their team during the in-season are especially familiar with this hard situation. You need to build on what other coach left and be cautious not to cause soreness due new training stimuli.

Sometimes coaches forgot that athletes need to be heavy, slow and sore (due new training stimuli), but that this  is the temporary effect until they get used to training and build work capacity. If you want to 'save' them from this, are we doing them a favor or counter-favor and limiting them in the long term?
I get especially frustrated when I hear this from the kid's coaches. They want to win the game, instead of building the athletes. They should spend most of their time sharpening the saw instead of sawing.

In team sports, due competition calendar (for more info please read Problems of Periodization of Training in ixed Sports), both processes should be presented at all times - sawing and sharpening - in different ratios (see peaking index) during different periods. If we just keep 'milking' the effects (a.k.a. sawing) the saw will get dull sooner or later. If we are just sharpening, what is use of it? These two processes are complementary.

This sawing~sharpening  complementary pair is very close to production~production capacity and building~testing (see my comment on 5/3/1 by Jim Wendler in Random Thoughts from the Training Camp). You just cannot be 'fresh' all the time, because you will de-train. You cannot 'play' all the time and be in play shape. Coaches need to start to understand the complementarity between these two contrary (at the first look) processes/principles in training. 

"Contraria sunt complementa" - Niels Bohr

Interview with Iñigo Mujika

I am glad to post the interview with Professor Iñigo Mujika whose work I’ve been following over the last couple of years. Recently, I have watched and enjoyed his presentation regarding high-intensity aerobic training in soccer at World Congress on Science and Football in Japan (see the review of the WCSF here). The video is posted at the end of the interview along with the link to Professor Mujika’ s website.  Enjoy the interview. 

Professor Iñigo Mujika

Mladen: Professor Mujika would you mind introducing yourself to the readers along with sharing some of your background and what you do currently? What do you do as a coach and what do you do as a researcher (field of interests)?

Iñigo: I am a sports physiologist from the Basque Country. I earned Ph.D.s in Biology of Muscular Exercise (University of Saint-Etienne, France) and Physical Activity and Sport Sciences (University of the Basque Country). I am also a Level III Swimming and Triathlon Coach. I was Senior Physiologist at the Australian Institute of Sport in 2003 and 2004. In 2005 I was the physiologist and trainer for the Euskaltel Euskadi professional cycling team and between 2006 and 2008 I was Head of Research and Development at Athletic Club Bilbao professional football club. I am now Director of Physiology and Training at USP Araba Sport Clinic, Physiology Consultant of the Spanish Swimming Federation, Associate Editor for the International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, and Associate Professor at the University of the Basque Country.

In terms of coaching, I work with Basque elite triathletes Hektor and Eneko Llanos since 2002, and with Ainhoa Murua since 2004. Through USP Araba Sport Clinic, I also work with several recreational athletes who try hard to achieve their performance goals, no matter how humble these may be. 

My main research interests in the field of applied sport science include training methods and recovery from exercise, tapering, detraining and overtraining. I have performed extensive research on the physiological aspects associated with sports performance in professional cycling, swimming, running, rowing, tennis, football and water polo. I received research fellowships in Australia, France and South Africa, published over 80 articles in peer reviewed journals, two books and 13 book chapters, and have given over 170 lectures and communications in international conferences and meetings.

Mladen: Most of the training knowledge regarding the planning strategies (periodization) of training comes from the ’traditional’ individual sports and it is hard, or almost imposible to implement them into modern sport games context. What is you viewpoint on this problem of planning in sport games and how did you adress it in your own coaching?

Iñigo:  There are two main reasons for the focus on individual sports: first, in these sports there are moderate to large correlations between physiological capacities, basic training factors such as volume and intensity, and competitive performance; secondly, these factors are much easier to isolate and quantify in comparison with the multi-faceted nature of team sports’ physiological demands, training and performance.

I agree that it is difficult to have an individualized approach to training in a team sport setting, but it is by no means impossible. One of my main goals when I worked as Head of Research and Development at the youth academy of Athletic Club Bilbao was precisely trying to individualize the training programs so that each player’s full potential could be realized. This is not easy, but according with the principle of training individualization, this approach must be adopted. It is a matter of balancing the time and effort dedicated to preparing each player as an individual athlete, and the time and effort put towards integrating the skills and competencies of those athletes to best work as a team.

Mladen: For example, peaking in traditional individual sports demands short period of best performance at certain time of the year, while in team games competition calendar demands high and stable level of performance over long period of months and ofter short preparatory period. So, how can the concept of peaking be applied in such situations?

Iñigo: Indeed, team sport athletes usually need to perform at a high level week after week if they want to be in contention for the championship when it really counts. Two competitive situations come to mind with regards to tapering and peaking for team sports: pre-season training to face a league format competitive season in the best possible condition; and peaking for a major international tournament such as the Olympic Games or World Championships.

For a league format competition, the periodization and tapering principles usually adopted by individual sport athletes could also be applied during the preseason, to make sure all players start the season at or as close as possible to their peak fitness. How the players maintain a high fitness platform throughout the season is a different issue that depends on variables such as time between games, travel, competitiveness of the opposition, accumulated minutes of match play, recovery strategies, injury…

In the case of a major tournament, the same tapering and peaking principles apply. How to best prepare for such a tournament depends on how well the players have been able to cope with the demands of their domestic seasons, how quickly they can recover, the training load they can take (if any!) before it is again reduced to achieve a fitness peak for the tournament. Once the tournament starts, recovery between games becomes the key issue, rather than trying to achieve additional fitness gains.

There are reports of these approaches being successfully applied by high level sport teams, so there is no reason to think it can not be done. In fact, the published studies highlight the potential for team sports to gain a competitive advantage if they can develop effective strategies for tapering prior to competition.

Mladen: Speaking of the problems and complexities of the sport games, how is one about to minimize negative interferences of the concurrent training if there is such  thing? Research is showing both positive and negative effects of concurrent training (strength and endurance). Since sport games demand mixed development of speed/power and endurance capacities, how is one about to develop them the best? Is block periodization concept offering some solutions or source of more problems for sport games contexts?

Iñigo: Most team sports require well developed speed, acceleration, deceleration, power, endurance and agility, in addition to a combination of physical, physiological, psychological, technical, and tactical factors that contribute to performance. However, the speed, power or endurance requirements for team sports athletes are not as high as they would be in “pure” strength or “pure” endurance athletes. Therefore, I think potential interactions among training contents and workloads that could be non-compatible or restrictively compatible are not a real issue in the context of team sports. 

All the requirements of team sports need to be trained, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that a major stimulus for adaptation in sports with such a long competition period is competition itself. What I mean by this is that a mixed training approach may be ideal in the preseason, but during the competitive season recovery from matches becomes a much bigger issue than training in search of additional adaptations, particularly for those players accumulating the most minutes of match-play.

Mladen: Observation of high-level endurance athlete shows certain pattern of „polarized training“, where training workload is distributed in 80/20 manner in favor of low intensity training.  What can we learn from this and how can we apply this in sport games? Are we over-doing high-intensity training? Should we add more low intensity and threshold runs?

Iñigo: It is true that most successful endurance athletes show a polarized training pattern below and above the lactate or respiratory threshold intensity. But rather than thinking in terms of “this is what we should (or should not) do in team sports”, we should think in terms of what the best training approach is to improve each of the physiological, technical, tactical, psychological and even social qualities of team sport players. I do not agree with the widely extended philosophy according to which all training contents should imitate the game. I see that as a very restrictive training approach.

I believe we should analyze the game demands in depth, then consider all the options and strategies available to us for improving the qualities players need to best meet those demands. If a player is limited by a lack of speed, what are the tools we can use to make him faster? If limited by his aerobic qualities, why shouldn’t we use the principles of endurance training? If she lacks strength and power, use the most effective and time-efficient methods to make her stronger and more powerful. Of course we also need to integrate the training of specific qualities into the team sport context, to make the individual athlete a better player, and the group of players a better team.

Mladen: What is your opinion on cross-training, for example cycling? Can we achieve peripheral/central adaptations using low/high intensity training while saving joints during the in-season or with injured players?

Iñigo: Cross-training, defined here as the participation in an alternative training mode exclusive to the one normally used, could indeed be a useful means to avoid or limit detraining during the off-season, avoid overuse injuries or during recovery from a sport-specific injury. The limited body of data available in the literature on the effects of cross-training as opposed to training cessation suggests that whereas moderately trained individuals may maintain fitness and delay deconditioning by performing dissimilar training modes, similar-mode cross-training would be necessarily in more highly trained individuals. What this means is that an elite player needs to carry out cross-training exercises that have similar physiological and biomechanical requirements to those of their sport for those exercises to be effective. But given that most team sports have a quite wide range of physiological and biomechanical requirements, almost any alternative sport or physical exercise should provide some degree of benefit on retaining training-induced adaptations. 

These recommendations, however, do not take into account the more than likely psychological benefits of performing alternative sports and recreational physical activities that take the pressure of competition or the stress of being injured away from players’ minds.

Mladen: There is more and more emphasis on small-sided games as a form of conditioning in sport games. Can such a practice yield more or less benefits if we take into consideration that more and more teams are solely relying on such philosophy and neglecting ’without the ball’ conditioning? 

Iñigo: This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that I do not think all training contents should imitate the game. Small-sided games are just another tool that coaches can use to make their players better. There may be some player qualities and training goals that are best achieved through small-sided games, but I think they are by no means the only training option a coach should consider.

Mladen: How can one implement large group aerobic power conditioning based on individual characteristics? What do you use as a criterion for individualization (what parameter and how do you test it) and do you base conditioning on the position played or the individual characteristics and why? Some coaches group their players based on the position played, and some group them on individual characteristics. What are the pro’s and con’s of each approach and can/should they be combined and how?

Iñigo: Within a team there are always some players who share very similar endurance qualities, so even though we talk about individualized training, we can always group players with similar values so that individualization does not become impossible to put in place. Most often, we can divide an entire football squad in three to five groups for an aerobic power session, and most players would be getting the right training stimulus nonetheless.

How we determine individual training intensities depends on what tests we use and what equipment we have access to. For most team sports, field tests such as the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test, the Shuttle Run Test or the University of Montréal Track Test should help us to determine effective and time-efficient aerobic conditioning training programs. 

My view is that we need to balance player’s individual characteristics, the demands of the position he or she plays in and training time available. A football goal keeper could of course improve his aerobic power through specific training, but beyond a given level, we have to ask ourselves whether that type of training is going to make him a better player and whether that is the best possible use of his training time.

Mladen: What do you think about the monitoring of the training effects (acute, immediate) as a form of feedback to adjust the training plan/program (medical, testing/performance, subjective/questionnaires, GPS/HR)? 

Iñigo: I think the more reliable information we can gather to assess training loads and evaluate training responses and adaptations, the more effective training can be. But only as long as we can deal with that information in a time-efficient manner and make sense of it. I always avoid collecting data unless I have the means to analyze it fast enough and interpret it in such a way that it becomes understandable and useful for the coaches. Otherwise, it is a waste of time and resources, and it undermines the credibility of a sport scientist. In my view, the coaching of athletes to prepare for competition will never be a total science and will always remain an art.

Mladen: And the last question – RSA (Repeated Sprint Ability). There is more and more research on this, but I see the trend of coaches neglecting true power/speed and strength work in favor of doing more RSA. 

Iñigo: My response to this question would be very similar to what I just said regarding small-sided games. Repeated-sprint ability is one of the various demands of team sport performance, but neglecting the other demands is of course a mistake. Repeated-sprint ability needs to be trained, and using RSA as a training method could have a big impact on various aspects important for team sport performance, but this is just another method to add to our training arsenal. 

Mladen: Thank you so much for this interview professor Mujika. Hopefully you will be willing to share more of your insights with us in the near future. Good luck with all your work and keep us updated. Thank you! 

For more info please visit Professor Iñigo Mujika website. 

Interview with Carl Valle. Part Two

I have interviewed Carl recently (click here for the part one of this interview) and here is the second part.

Carl shared some great thoughts on the recovery and regeneration in this part.

Carl Valle

Mladen: Recovery Monitoring is all the rage now with teams. Why are people still getting hurt and ill from training and competition?

Carl: Simple. We are sometimes monitoring bad training, poor practice design, and voodoo sports medicine.  With your experience with professional football I am sure you have seen a vast difference between clubs but monitoring is only as good as the training and as good as the willingness for the team coach to listen and make adjustments.  GPS and even more precise instrumentation doesn’t replace or even guide coaching wisdom

Recovery monitoring is reactionary and not helpful unless the training is sound and well designed. Studying bad programs isn’t that helpful because the data isn’t going to make major changes that help. With all of this technology and science we should see some changes? Where are the freaks from all of the monitoring? Shouldn’t there be a legion of Barry Sanders and Usain Bolts? Where are all the Renaldo factories with these training facilities that do blood analysis and saliva swabs?  Smith machine squats with machine lateral raises isn’t good training, so the information from it is junk data so why study that?  

Monitoring of retarded training is.. well.. retarder as well

Mladen: Thermotherapy is a dying art of Regeneration is it worth it?

Carl: Hot and Cold will always be part of training regeneration, the question what is this really doing?  Team cyrosaunas, exotic Russian hot sauna protocols, contrast options with special ratios, it’s all very nice but consistency is key. With any modality the big question is what measurable impact are we getting, and is it sustainable? 

Mladen: Well what do you use? Are you still doing a lot of thermotherapies?

Carl: I am not saying I am a minimalist, but I only use them to compliment the training.  You can just add modalities like you would pick sushi from a menu, it’s a very specific process. For example, what are we getting when we jump in a sauna? Less blood flow to the deeper areas of muscle, but near the skin will actually get warmer. Joints tend to feel better with heat as sometimes pain will diminish.  Cold is also a surprise, as the bloodflow paradoxically will change over time during and after the application. Too many people think about the application duration and effects instead of what happens through the day and microcycle.  Pain is still an enigma right now and everyone thinks they cracked the Da Vinci Code or something.

Thermotherapies do create some hormone changes but I don’t see anything anabolic necessarily but the environment is more favorable for anabolism. Let’s not think thermotherapy is going to make a major change in training. It mainly helps the tone of soft tissue. Just having more glucose is more favorable environment post training but don’t worry about testing positive from too much sugar in your latte.  Regeneration is very subtle.

To utilize recovery methods you need to train hard~smart first... I bet she just did 5x5 Squats, followed with 3x7min 30''/30'' Billat intervals...  

Mladen: Any simple tips with a complicated application?

Carl:

Ice- Acutely after injury for one day with crushed pellets and thin towel. Maximum 2-3 days if exercise is an option. Prolonged ice will spell doom and treating pain with it is a bad idea for the most part.

Cold Shower- The depression studies excited a lot of people because the neurotransmitter adaptations and changes. One athlete had a HRM strap and did cold showers twice a week for 6 weeks and saw a dramatic rise in HRV with the Kubios software last year and morning wake seemed to be stable without travel impact and CNS drop. How much was placebo nobody knows but I treat some cold and hot therapies like passive workouts to the nervous system.

Cold Plunge- Some HRV studies show some positive benefits. Cold plunge tend to do a great job with athletes suffering major stiffness from pain, but no research shows extensibility changes from it.  I believe fascia responds to passive parasympathetic interventions but muscle needs exercise. Some coaches say myofascial system is symbiotic muscle.

Hot Bath- I prefer this at night to help with sleep.  Add in some power jet sprays and athletes seem to be compliant with it. Remember not to pull a “Hall Pass” and fall asleep! When traveling guys like to hop in the tub and get the tunes going so they can get deeper sleep.  The research confirms this and hot bath’s are easy to get done. Many European hotels don’t have bathtubs and some hotels in New York are tiny so call in advance.

Sauna- Build up to 20 minutes by starting at 8 and add 2-5 minutes a week or per session if you are doing 2 a week.  Alternating options cold showers and hot saunas are nice but compliance trumps the esoteric protocols.  Longer applications are fine for some but each athlete needs to be accountable to what is their own “sweet spot”.

Contrast- If it feels good you are doing it right! Jokes aside contrast work is nice for athletes that seem to want to feel better but nothing is wrong with training loads. Training monotony can creep up and athletes need another stimulus but can’t just do random activities to refresh them. This is why advanced athletes crave change because they have been static stretching or foam rolling and need a break from the norm. Physiologically not much is happening with contrast methods but comfort options are part of a program, but no myogensis or protein synthesis is increasing here.

General- Never do external applications in the GPP unless you are doing triples or hard doubles. Sometimes I have done a few sessions of eternal applications to artificially do more for a teaching effect. More practice of skill in a short time period is helpful for a training camp or combine prep period. Access to good coaching is scarce so one has to max out the time. Still, in general you must build up natural capacities first before adding any modalities.

Mladen: You have done some interesting things with soft tissue therapy and imaging and orthopedic testing, any updates here?

Carl: One particular facility outside a major city in South Africa has some interesting imaging systems for soft tissue. Somehow they were able to digitize the body rapidly, very similar to Thermography but far more sensitivity and accuracy. Along with that data stream they have extremely high resolution MSK ultrasound. A rumor is that someone from Western Europe defected after spending time in Turku.  Since you are from Serbia Boris Tadic received treatment from Dr. Orava, and what they are doing with major stars such as David Beckham and many elite athletics competitors in Finland is awesome.  Vibromyography is not technically “imaging” but it is fascinating to see with post massage, but it’s commercially not ready yet. Like I said earlier some interesting bodysuits are showing some cool data, but are cost prohibitive unless you are the Navy Seals are using them. Myontec is a promising company but again with any data capturing device what is the impact? Undefeated Rugby teams? 4.1 combine runs? EMG is part of the imaging process, especially research wise. Tissue is not just static artwork on a computer screen, it’s a live ballet so the higher resolution MSK ultrasound equipment will rise in popularity with those in the know. Ed Ryan confirmed my beliefs when he shared his experience with the equipment.  How many therapists in the US are using Elastography to assist with soft tissue therapy or even experienced it? We need to catch up here.

Mladen: Record keeping is a big burden, who is doing a great job now with athletes and data on recovery?

Carl: You should see some people’s record keeping. It ranges from “it’s in my head” to sophisticated ipad systems with internal algorithms. My favorite is what Ryan Reynolds, the ASU strength and conditioning coach, is doing with his teams. He is a respected coach and the 2011 NCAA champion softball team certainly didn’t struggle. Just because he has one of the most progressive data systems in the country, doesn’t mean that was all he was doing was taking notes. 95% of results stem from good training design before the training and constant effort on the floor. Brilliant coach and people need to listen to him, as his sport science knowledge is top of the line. I have only met him once but I need to go back to Arizona for another visit soon to see what he doing again.

Good record keeping kills off debates because either it’s measured or it’s imagined.  Show me the numbers. At the end of the year are people better? How did it happen?

Record keeping should not be like this

Mladen: You went to the Netherlands in 2008 and Finland and learned a lot about the practical use of lactate and HRV. What have you learned since?  

Carl: Repeat Sprint Ability is diluted with many teams to the point that I am under the belief that we are overthinking conditioning to the level of being foolish. Speed and other relatives of it need to be compared properly. This is why I think more 15m dash times need to be tested fresh to see what people are capable of. Remember the average “speed” of some of these repeat “sprints” are slower than high school JV hurdlers over one barrier! If you want more ketchup get more tomatoes, not add more tomato juice.  Elite soccer is played in two time periods split in half with rest, not 90 minutes straight, so some sport scientists forget to adjust to the fact that the game does allow for some internal recovery. Condition only enough to keep acute power drops from occurring and to support practice and immune health. Nothing more. RSA is about Repeat Sprint Ability and not Repeat Slow Ability.

HRV is tricky because no matter what you use it’s an estimate of total load.  Some of the studies of parasympathetic reactivation smells like some of the electrical discussions that Coach Francis had 7 years ago, but let’s be honest here. HRV is one data stream and only a few set-ups are doing live acquisition during sprints.  Analyzing post game is going to get fatigue, but after each sprint is a nice feature because it helps performance more. Monitoring recovery helps decide what to do, but monitoring training helps getting better.

Lactate scores is not a magic number generator as clearance rate is important. When I see low lactate scores after slow sprints, I don’t see sprint capacity I see endurance volume interference and the smell of “fitness coaches”. On the other hand doing too much power work will create a Ferrari with a transmission ready to blow since team sports are not track meets and need more conditioning.  What is optimal is unique to the program and the athletes being trained. Team chemistry is important and one has to think that Kobe Bryant (Knee degeneration) spending time on the bench instead of practice could be an example with some need for more experimentation. Everyone preaches individualism at coaching conferences but I don’t see the tailoring when I visit.

Mladen: Sleep is talked about, what aspects of interventions seem to work best for you? How do you visualize sleep data yourself?

Carl: The metrics of sleep from a hypnogram are going to be trendy but relationships and honesty between coaches and athletes will trump the data crunchers. I am more interested in the Data Benders, those that improve outcomes than those that show scatterplots of failed training experiments.  Actigraphy and products like www.myzeo.com are good ways to create hypothesis of interventions but usually the athletes that are not compliant with the data capturing are the ones that need the interventions! No matter how great the biomechanical data collection or supplement protocol is, many professional athletes are passed out in the back of a Hummer Limo before game day from massive “ethanol battles”.  Does the blood panel after game day calculate that? We need more Tony Dungy coaches that are able to make a connection with people and coaches that seem like second fathers. Those are the true masters.

After some reduction in fiestas and stability is created, a constant sleep and wake time is the strongest way to improve sleep besides good training loads. One can do REM and other sleep scoring methods but most of the impact is gong to come from precise loading, stimulant and alcohol reduction, and good sleep hygiene. Add in a hot bath and massage here and there and now you are doing something special.

Get consistent first, then worry about the rest. First things come first.

Mladen: Nutrition is always going to be a focal issue with athletes but what do you use? Anything besides the tips one usually sees in articles?

Carl: My nutrition information isn’t going to be earth shattering but the tricks of the trade is what KPI like variables one can change. First buying custom wide mouth water bottles with measurement lines is paramount. Add in a team logo and color of choice now we are getting somewhere. The wide mouth cap allows for protein powders to be used.

After the basics are covered I stick to the 3 meals and 3 snack philosophy since athletes simply don’t have the time to cook. 45 minute desert recipes?  Who does that? Athletes need explicit shopping lists and restaurant suggestions and how to budget money. Some coaches even scan grocery receipts.

Buy fishoils, protein powders, creatine, and functional foods in 90 day orders every 80 days or so. Only a handful of supplements work so save your money on things like dried fruit, lean protein sources, and fresh fruits and vegetables. Protein powders are vital as they save money and are portable. Again three meals only- what people usually do as athletes is much different than physique people. Bodybuilding has a lower frequency of training so more meals is not practical with many athletes unless they live at a training center. Digestion is a real issue so sometimes GES and bars are helpful.

Mladen: You have spent some time with some exceptional therapists and coaches learning what works and what is not very useful or significant. Anything the readers would want to get to shed some light on regeneration?

Carl: If people wish to know more about what world class therapists are doing and what coaches are doing in case studies. They can email me at carlfvalle@gmail.com if they want to join a small group of coaches that crowd source money for some great educational mini courses in mediacast format.