In today’s “Friday with the Doc’s” Dr. Yessis and I discuss his latest article “Is it athleticism or just excellent play?”.  In the conversation we discuss the reasons behind the article, general training strategies and specific training strategies to help develop athlete’s “athleticism” and skills.  Click the link below to listen.

Friday with the Doc’s Dr Yessis 9 30 11

 As always please leave any questions below or on our Facebook page.  I hope you enjoy!

In a field where there are so many different ideas, methods, theories, practices-whatever you want to call it- there is even more controversy in regards to what you should or shouldn’t do.  At the heart of the arguments for many coaches of physical preparation is the Functional Movement Screen (FMS).  The FMS is sort of the country music in performance training: you either love it or hate it. There aren’t many people in the middle.  If you do not know what the FMS is I’d like to invite you out from under your rock and tell you to take a look at it.  These seven “tests”, and I use that term loosely, are just what the title says- a screen.  The primary goal of the FMS is to hopefully find nothing dramatically wrong with an athlete. Honestly I think that’s where a lot of people miss the boat (but that’s for another day).  

The second purpose with the FMS is to see if anything hurts.  If your athletes have pain with any of these screens get them to your ATC-L and/or a doctor to see what’s really going on.  The third goal is to find what the athlete has issues with.  It could be a musculoskeletal imbalance, the inability to perform a general movement pattern, a stability problem, or a mobility issue.  Notice this is the third objective as I see it.  I can tell you from experience that more often than not, your athletes are going to score 2’s, which means it’s not perfect, but it’s average. The big question now, and the reason I have Mike Robertson on our speaking docket this year, is what do you do with an FMS score?  How can you continue to improve performance? By that, I mean how can you still actually train based on what their scores are?  Today I’m going to give you my interpretation of this, how I handle it, and where I can see it going in the future.

I sat in the 1 day FMS class in 2009 with Danny Raimondi, who at the time was my assistant.  Dr. Lee Burton taught the course and it was truly eye opening.  I was drinking the FMS Kool-Aid more than a frat boy doing keg stands on a Friday night.  We screened everyone, had corrective strategies for each athlete based on the teams’ average scores and their individual scores.  It was awesome.  I then took a step back and noticed we were spending a lot of time on this, and consequently, much less time training.  I didn’t like this, so like any other performance coach, I freaked and cut it back. Way back.  We kept in some of the corrective work, but definitely did not focus much on it.  That leads me to this past Tuesday.  I was sitting in my office that has the FMS charts all over the place after a group with our Men’s Basketball team and I had an “ah-ha” moment.  Watching our specialized exercises, I noticed some guys had issues getting certain positions, some had issues holding it for multiple reps, and some had no issues at all.  It slapped me in the face like a Jon “Bones” Jones spinning elbow: a simple, effective way of implementing corrective exercises.      

I need to give a side note before I get into this.  Gray Cook and Dr. Burton are a LOT smarter than I am.  They understand this system in ways that I’m sure I’ll never be able to comprehend.  With that being said though, they are not strength coaches.  Gray is a PT while Lee is a Ph D and the director of Athletic Training at his university, and, as such, they wear a different hat than I do.  I’m not completely sold that you will ever “fix” someone due to the number of perfect repetitions it takes to “rewire” the nervous system.  What I am sold on is that the “corrective means” help you immediately after you perform them.  They help with your general exercise technique.  That thought is what slammed me to the ground like Hulk slammed Andre The Giant in 1983 (yes Charlie that’s a wrestling reference).        

What if we took a step back after we screened our athletes and looked at the scores vs our programming?  After this, what if we found where we should implement the corrective exercises to help improve performance of the exercises that we know will help improve the athlete’s performance in competition?  I can give you a simple example.  If you follow what Dr. Yessis teaches you will know that the pawing action in running needs to be improved to increase top end speed.  Looking at the pawing action in running, there are general exercises that help improve this (good morning and back raise).  Now “zooming” out even more, what FMS “tests” are similar to these?  The Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR).  Ok, great, so now what?  Well, while “warming up” to your working set/sets you would incorporate the corrective exercises.  If it helps the ASLR, and the ASLR is the general pattern of the exercise performed, can you conclude that the general should assist the specific and therefore improve the ability to perform the movement?  I think so.  What about bigger movements, like say, the squat?  This is tricky, but I think that this will make a bit of sense.  Proper mobility builds stability. I think we can all agree on that.  I also think we can all agree on the idea of us not wanting to “fatigue the core” prior to squatting. With that in mind, we look at what tests will improve mobility, or work on the imbalances in mobility first as we warm up.  

First would be the imbalance: a different score on the ASLR, shoulder mob, lunge or step over would be attacked first.  Second would be if the athlete has a 1 or 2 in the ASLR or shoulder mob- I’d attack that during the warm up.  You can also incorporate “general” work in their warm up to the exercise as well based on what you know about athletes in the particular sport.  Using basketball as the example again, there’s a really good chance that they have poor ankle mobility and tight hip flexors.  Those two are limiting factors in squatting so everyone does some ankle mobility work and hip flexor stretching before their first warm up set.  I typically tell my guys they need 4 warm up sets, though I do not prescribe loads and reps for them.  The “warm up prescription” is typically, “get there in 4, be smarter than dumb.”  I do prescribe what they need to do when they’re not under the bar, however.

I realize that everyone loves a tasty beverage and that people want to feel like they “belong”, but before we get on a sugar high from all the Kool-Aid and get married into a specific camp on training we need to look at what we are doing and how we are actually impacting the athlete.  What can we do to actually help them get better at their sport?  At the end of the day that is what our job is.  I feel that is a way to make improvements in training and the ability of the means to have a positive transfer.  In the next part of the series I will go describe how I use the “corrective exercises” with general exercises; in the third part, I’ll discuss how I’ve applied more specific means towards the training of basketball players, and how you might include these exercises into your own sports.

Is it athleticism or just excellent play?

A trendy buzzword today is athleticism.  It is bandied about mainly by commentators whenever an athlete performs or executes a skill well.  For example, in football if a receiver leaps up high and catches the ball he demonstrates athleticism.  If a running back eludes a defender with a good cutting action he demonstrates athleticism.  If a player is exceptionally fast on a fast break in basketball he demonstrates athleticism.

If you watched any of the basketball games in the NCAA tournament would you say that some of the players exemplified athleticism or that they were excellent players who did exceptionally well? Some of the  best games that I witnessed in the tournament showed very aggressive play with each player constantly in motion and executing just about all of  skills involved in basketball on a very high level.

When you hear of players exhibiting athleticism, you’re given the impression that they executed some outstanding skill that is typically not seen in the game.  This is really a misnomer.  This is what we should expect and see of all players if they are to be considered high-level or elite.  It is certainly what I would expect of the basketball teams that make it to the round of 16 and especially so in the round of eight and four. 

The only exceptions to this would be if the team had only one or two players who are so good that they are able to carry the rest of the team.  This may work for a while but it should never carry over into the last two rounds unless the opponents are much weaker.

Because we typically see so few players exhibiting outstanding all-around play and execution of the game skills, we have come to believe that the players who do this are truly exceptional and very “athletic”.  But if players were trained effectively as they should be to be to play in a national tournament, we should expect such play from the players.  This also applies to collegiate football and baseball.

In other words, athleticism should not stand out like a sore thumb.  It should be commonplace.  However, because so few players are capable of very high-level execution of the basic skills we can’t help but notice when we see such outstanding execution of basic skills.  In professional football, basketball and baseball, players are rewarded handsomely when they are able to do this.

Lately however, it seems that mediocrity is taking the place of high-level performance.  When there is one iota of greater or more successful execution of the game skills, players are rewarded in the belief that this is what is considered to be high-level or that the player is now demonstrating great “athleticism”.

The bottom line – we are not developing the full potential of the players and accepting mediocrity as being high-level.  All high-level and elite players should be able to demonstrate high-level execution of the game skills.  It should be considered normal, not exceptional.  The truly exceptional athlete will stand out in his even higher level of execution of the main game skills.  This is when games will get truly exciting!

For more information, read “Build a Better Athlete” and “Sports: Is It All B.S.?”

2012 Seminar Presenter Joel Jamieson was kind enough to share the 1st part of his 3 part series “Specifity of Training” from his web site www.8weeksout.com .  This is precisely why we are so excited to have him on board again.  Joel is, in my opinion one of the best and brightest minds in the field, but what separates him is his innate ability to communicate the science of training to other coaches.  Enjoy Part 1, and be on the lookout for part 2 coming soon.  For more from Joel please check his site, www.8weeksout.com, out.

Landon Evans is the final speaker to be introduced for the 2012 Seminar.  We are really excited to have Landon on board.  His methods, knowledge and excitement to not just educate but to learn, are exactly what we are looking for here at www.cvasps.com.  Landon will be speaking alongside longtime friend Joel Jamieson in what is sure to be an absolutely awe inspiring presentation that I personally cannot wait for.

JD: Landon, thanks for taking the time to do this interview.  We’re excited to introduce you as one of the speakers of the 2012 Seminar.  Could you please give our readers a bit of your background?

LE: I started my education in computer engineering.  After 3 years and much reflecting, I jumped across campus into exercise physiology.  From there I began interning with the Olympic strength & conditioning staff at Iowa State under the direction of Rohrk Cutchlow.  During my own quest for knowledge, I began searching in the “strength” field of strength & conditioning.  I felt that all athletes were weak, and it was my job to get them as strong as possible.  With my blinders on, I read everything I could on strength development. As such, I began developing a bias towards this facet of physical preparation.  However, as time went on, I began to see the downfalls of solely developing strength while I was working with the throwers at Iowa State.  They were stronger, but there were power and speed elements that were simply lacking.  This prompted further investigation.  This is when I was introduced to Charlie Francis, Mel Siff, and Yuri Verkhoshansky. Once that introduction was established, it was a snowball effect.  I felt I was re-learning everything over again.  I’m extremely grateful that I went down that path, one filled with critical thought and science driven information.

After finishing my undergraduate work and internship with the Olympic S&C staff at Iowa State, I was fortunate to have been asked by Rohrk to become his full-time assistant at Illinois State University. While being at ISU for 3 ½ years, I acquired my masters in exercise physiology, and helped transform the strength & conditioning department to a successful, forward-thinking program.  ISU has pumped out some quality individuals in this field.  Most of the graduate assistants that went through the programs are either head coaches or assistants at the collegiate or high school level.  They are all doing very well.  I’m very proud of them all.

After some more reflection on the future, my wife and I believed we needed to experience the private sector in this field to possibly gain some flexibility with our family life.  Unfortunately there weren’t many individuals that I trusted or knew of that would have offered me a position to continue to grow.  Luckily I developed a relationship with my good friend Mark McLaughlin back in 2005 at the Verkhoshansky seminar in Chicago.  After many conversations on the phone, 2 flights to Portland, and much discussion between Steph (my wife) and I, we made it happen. Working in collaboration with Mark McLaughlin at Performance Training Center as his director of athletic development allowed me to work with an extensive spectrum of athletes from middle school children, to a diverse group of professionals.  Additionally, PTC was equipped with a technology called the OmegaWave.  Since Omegawave is located in Portland, I was fortunate enough to have a number of exchanges with Val Nadeskin and others that were a part of the Omegawave team or individuals that were networked with Omegawave.  Ultimately, I had alot of great experiences in Portland.

In 2010, I returned to ISU to continue coaching, and enrolled into the Didactic Program of Dietetics (DPD) program so I would be eligible to apply to dietetic internship programs.   This is required to sit for your RD exam.  Fast forward 1 ½ years to today.  I’m currently full-time with my dietetic internship rotations, part-time at ISU, and continuing to consult online.  I’m expected to finish with my rotations by the end of January.

JD: When people hear the name Landon Evans they immediately think of some “different” methods than those used by most coaches in the US.  Who has influenced you the most in developing the methods you practice? Where can our readers find information from these people?

LE: First of all, I would hope people don’t think of me as the guy that utilizes different methods.  The goal isn’t to use different methods for novelty sake, but to elicit the appropriate adaptations I desire.  So, if that requires methodics that are thought to be “different”, then that is fine.

I’m a student of many.  The way I operate and think is a collaboration of experiences that include individuals such as: business managers/department directors, physical education teachers, researchers from a variety of disciplines, high end sport coaches, and most importantly, the responses my athletes reveal to me.

As to where to find information? The Internet!  I’m serious.  I wouldn’t have found 90% of the information I’ve acquired without the Internet.  Learn how to be an investigator and don’t stop until you find the answers to your questions.  If you are a fan of non-english articles/texts, utilize Google translator.  I’ve found many articles and books from this.

For those who are looking for authors/scientists/coaches/etc, here is a small list of people that have influenced me in one way or another: D Pfaff, C Francis, S Pavlov, V Seluyanov, V Nadeskin, A Viru, C Bosco, P Komi, A Vermeil, A Aragon, M Siff, J Daniels, M Cardindale, D Dasheva, T Zhelyazkov, V Issurin, C Valle, R Enoka, Y Verkhoshansky, G Dyson, B McEwen, J DeLuca, J Hartmann, S McGill, V Zatsiorsky, R Sapolsky, D Voet, L McDonald, R Wilk, M Reinold, A Bondarchuk, S Gropper,  etc.

JD: From my conversations with you, you don’t think in terms of “strength” exercises, “power” exercises, etc.  When you prescribe a movement such as oxidative squats, most coaches would think that is “different”. Can you please touch on your outlook on the role of special strength training in the preparation of athletes?

LE: This is a loaded question, but I’ll try to answer this with as minimal words as possible.
First and foremost, training is much more than exercise selection.  The primary goal of training is to increase biological power.  By biological power, I mean increasing the outputs of all the governing biological systems.  This includes systems such as the metabolic systems (aerobic, glycolytic, alactic), neurohormonal, central nervous system, autonomic system, immune system, etc.  Specific movement patterns are slaves to these systems. If you move your mind away from exercise selection and typical weekly formats, and view your program through a lens that is cognizant of these biological systems, your planning and organizing of training will be much more clear and much more directed to specific adaptations vs. utilizing the kitchen sink approach to planning and organizing the training.  Plus, you’ll stop “sprinkling” exercises onto your program.  Unfortunately, this happens all the time.  Coaches see a new YouTube video from their favorite Internet coach, and they just throw it in to their program.

People have discussed that most kids these days are over-worked with huge volumes.  Well, outside of the idea that more is better, I think a lot of coaches are afraid of removing exercises or drills from their programs with the fear they will lose some sort of magical benefit the exercise or drill provided.  Instead of removing or changing their programs, these coaches continue adding more without removing anything.  Special strength training is simply a way to direct your exercises appropriately.  When done correctly, it changes a multitude of characteristics of the athlete, and allows them to perform at a much higher level.

For example, not all squats are the same.  How you perform the exercise will direct its adaptation.  Oxidative squats will elicit a higher aerobic stimulus to the working musculature, whereas traditional squats utilizing heavier loads will elicit a higher neuromuscular stimulus.  Both can be useful, but it will always depend on the context in which it is used. The primary point I want to ensure people understand is that they should understand exactly what their exercises are doing, and stop prescribing exercises just for the sake of it.  Go deeper in your search for answers.  Leave the superficial stuff to the Internet coaches.

JD: To continue with your methods, if there is a way to finish this statement please do.  “The biggest correction that coaches in the US need to make in their programming is…”

LE: I don’t want to generalize that US coaches need to make corrections.  All coaches need to make corrections, regardless of their geographic location.  One thing coaches need is to do is stop believing that the grass is greener on the other side.  Overseas material is great, but you need to go through it with a critical eye and a solid filter.   All information is useful, but to what degree depends on your personal experiences and current knowledge of the training process.  Just because the author has a wild last name doesn’t imply his/her information is gold.

For all coaches, a couple things that I believe are meaningful are: allow yourself to evolve in all aspects in your profession, shift your focus to the sciences vs. the barbell, look at the past to appreciate where some of this information came from, and gather clues others may have missed.
Evolution is required for the survival of any species.  To operate in the same mindset you did 1 year ago, 5 years ago, 10+ years ago is a disservice to your athletes.  We are exposed to new research and technology on a daily basis now.  It is criminal to dismiss this.

Take a step back from the exercises and the set/rep/load parameters for a minute.  Strip this down to the core.  Study more of the biological orchestra that is allowing your kids to jump higher, run faster, lift more weight, etc.  Be a student of the sciences, not the weight room.   Not only will this make you a better coach, it will remove many biases you have created that may have kept you within your narrow frame of mind. The past isn’t sexy.  Unfortunately, we are relying on others to interpret the past and pass it on.  What if they interpreted it wrong?  Take the time to look into older training books and articles and make your own connections and conclusions.

JD: Part of you presentation is going to be centered on the nutritional effects on bioenergetics and training.  You mentioned that you recently went back to school to get a secondary degree in nutrition.  What were your motives behind this and how has it changed you as a coach?

LE: I was fortunate to have been given the opportunity to go back to school and enter into a DPD program.  I am not receiving another degree from this.   Since I already carry the prerequisite degrees, the completion of a DPD program was required before I could apply to a dietetic internship (DI) program.  Upon completion of the DI, I will be eligible to sit for the registered dietitian (RD) exam.

The motives were simple.  I share the same passion for training as I do with nutrition.  Plus, I work in an institution that is heavily governed by many organizations and a rule-set that is a mile long.  Being legal is important to my workplace.  Providing nutrition information in this setting can be tricky in certain contexts without being an RD.During my rotations so far, I’ve personally grown.  It has been great to get a fresh, unbiased opinion on how I professionally operate.  I think all too often, most professionals (in any field) become complacent and are settled into their routines.   Additionally, it’s easier to surround yourself with individuals that share the same beliefs and values.  Unfortunately, these people will rarely criticize your actions.  That has not been the case so far.  My preceptors are simply telling me how it is.   This has already changed my outlook on a number of things, which I believe will positively translate to my coaching.

JD: Thanks for taking the time to be interviewed, Landon.  To close out could you give our readers something they should be looking forward to from the presentation you and Joel Jamieson will put together for the 2012 Seminar?

LE: Expect a long, engaging, and practical presentation.  Joel and I don’t have the details worked out yet, but our primary focus is to allow people to leave with ideas that can be set into motion.   I love to present, but more importantly, I love to inspire and teach someone.  I want the attendees to take what Joel and I present on, and make use of the information to uncover something that I didn’t know. I just hope that the attendees shares that information with me!

This week’s “Friday with the Docs” is the remainder of Dr. Mainfang Ruan’s dissertation.  Dr. Ruan has graciously offered us his dissertation, and today we are posting the final two chapters, references and appendices of his great work.  We have spoken quite a bit about special exercises on this site, and Dr. Ruan’s research revolves around the stretch shortening cycle, and, more importantly, the depth jump.  All of us at Central Virginia Sport Performance are extremely appreciative of Dr. Ruan for sharing this with us and our readers.  Click the link below to read his work.  I hope you enjoy.

Dr. Ruan Part 2

The following four posts can be found at OneResult.com.  The guys there put out some pretty good stuff.  I’ve been writting for them sence the inception of the company and I’m really proud to have done so.  They’ve also been involved with the seminar so check them out.  In this four part series I give a general run down of how I progress athletes through the off season to improve strength, power and performance.  Thanks to the direction of Dr. Micheal Yessis and Yosef Johnson we’ve made quite a few changes that will be discussed in future articles.  If you have any questions that you would like answered, please post them below and/or on Facebook.  We will be running a podcast in the coming weeks for this series.

Part 1 of 4

Part 2 of 4

Part 3 of 4

Today’s podcast is with Cal Dietz.  In the conversation Coach Dietz and Coach DeMayo discuss the Sport Back Squat, how to implement it, some progressions to using it and different forms of exercises that Coach Dietz implements.  I’d like to give a huge thank you to Cal for taking the time to have this discussion.  Just live every other conversation with him, I walked away a better coach, and hope you enjoy it as well.

Cal Dietz Podcast

This week’s “Friday with the Docs” is an absolute treat from Dr. Mainfang Ruan.  Dr. Ruan has graciously offered us his dissertation, and today we are posting the first three chapters of his great work.  We have spoken quite a bit about special exercises on this site, and Dr. Ruan’s research revolves around the stretch shortening cycle, and, more importantly, the depth jump.  All of us at Central Virginia Sport Performance are extremely appreciative of Dr. Ruan for sharing this with us and our readers.  Click the link below to read his work.  I hope you enjoy.

Dr. Ruan 1

In today’s post Yosef Johnson of Ultimate Athlete Concepts asks some great questions about why we are implementing specific means in training and what the goal of physical preperation of athletes is actually attempting to acheive.

What is the main aim of a strength/performance coach? Is it to help prevent injury?  Should one adhere to the Hippocratic Oath i.e. not screw the athlete up? Is getting the athlete generally stronger ad nauseum our main goal?  If we were to ask ten different coaches, I feel certain we would get ten different answers. What is the right answer? In my work with athletes, I let them know at the very beginning that there are only three things that matter amongst the training objectives: what a school will give you a scholarship for, what they will give you an Olympic medal for, and what a professional team will pay you for. Everything else is irrelevant. Does that mean a functional movement screen bears little relevance? Yes, if your only intent in using the screen is to get better at the screen. What about combine testing? Same. Take these measurements with a grain of salt. The combine looks at several qualities. Don’t make the assumption that improving a combine test score or FMS screen will positively correlate with skill on the field. The same applies to powerlifting and Olympic lifting. Strength, in its many manifestations, is important for many sports, but it’s usually not the goal.

Read the rest of this entry