We have received lots of questions from our athletes and parents about the hows and whys RE: our implementation of what Coach Keen always refers to, in his training short-hand, as "Jay Schroeder EXTREME ISOs!!!"… Given that he does use this method a lot, *and* the fact that they are not actually Jay Schroeder isometrics as prescribed at his facility (at least, as best we can tell), we figured some explanation was due.
First, some history:
Many folks in the S&C community remember the hype surrounding Adam Archuletta and the 2001 NFL Combine, when he created a stir with not only his outstanding performance, but what people began to understand his combine training to be. Videos on ESPN of him doing ‘crazy stuff’ lit a fire of curiosity in people that was only stoked by the Jay Schroeder video ‘Freak of Training’… Our own Coach Keen bought that video, but found it so ambiguous as to methods and implementation as to almost completely preclude constructing a program just based on watching it.
Soon came the whole Jay Schroeder/DB Hammer/Brad Nuttall identity scandal on the internet, with the takeaway, GMAAC-wise, being that Coach Keen also emerged from that information fracas with “The Best Sports Book Ever” in his vast library, in an attempt to further understand and implement this type of program.
In the near future after the arrival of DB Hammer and Inno-Sport, there were other training groups and individuals who seemed to implement these isos, or other similar quasi-Inno-Sport and quasi-Evo Sport methods, into their training regimes, to include WannaGetFast and Kelly Baggett.
Coach Keen, after having seen almost all the products offered by the above-named individuals, has settled on his *own* way of implementing what he calls the “Jay Schroeder EXTREME ISOs,” but which are, in fact, just isometrics done in a way that he prefers (read: finds effective) after cobbling together all the above training materials. His opinion is that he does things about half Jay Schroeder-style and half Inno-Sport-style, but that idea is confusing in itself if you are one of the many people who believe that Jay Schroeder and DB Hammer may in fact be one and the same.
That, however, is enough for now. Regardless of who 'invented' them, and who is writing under what pseudonym, the bottom line is that Coach Keen has observed (recorded) measurable improvement when using these methods, primarily in power and power-endurance. The lower body use of these methods seems particularly helpful to the vertical jump. So, when programming these ISOs for GMAAC athletes (usually as part of 'GPP' or 'Off-Season' programs) his progression/set of rules is as follows:
1) First, when doing the bodyweight-only (which includes adding external load, via a weighted vest or belt) EXTREME ISOs, he uses a group of positions that closely resembles what is rumored to be Jay Schroeder’s core group:
• Lunges
• Push-Ups
• Scap Pull-Ups/Rows
• Wall Squats
• Glute-Ham or Single-Leg Reaching DL
These movements are, unless otherwise noted, held for a total duration of 5 minutes per contraction (per limb, if a unilateral movement). If an athlete is a 'true' power/strength athlete (as opposed to power-endurance), Coach Keen starts him or her off with 20% bodyweight added, and all ISOs are held to one minute (instead of five), with weight added once one minute is reached.
2) When performing these ISOs, the key is to, WHILE MAINTAINING PERFECT FORM, use the antagonists to pull oneself into as far a stretch position as possible, and then try to pull farther still, actively causing the opposing muscle pairs to ‘duke it out'. This is incredibly intense, and potentially painful, when done properly.
3) When performing the ISOs that utilize dumbbells (DB), the progression over time is from a hold -> drop and hold -> drop and reversal of movement:
• DB Upright Rows
• DB Bent-Over Rear Delt Raise
• DB Curl
• USSR Lunges
• Ankle Weight Hip Extension
These movements are initially performed with a 5-7# dumbbell for each movement for a timed hold. Once an individual can hold the dumbbell for 45 seconds, then progression is made to a drop-and-catch with a 5-7# dumbbell. Once the individual can ‘stick the catch’ for 3 sets of 15 reps per movement, a progression is made where the dumbbell is reversed as rapidly as possible, instead of stopped/caught, and held for 10 seconds, after the reversal motion, at the beginning of the eccentric portion of the movement (where the drop would be initiated from) before completely relaxing and dropping the weight again. 2-4 sets of 5-10 reps are done here, with speed and mastery being the goal. The USSR Lunges are simply bouncing/bodyweight lunges done with the same force absorption principles as the DB shoulder/upper work.
4) The EXTREME ISOs are usually done as a ‘recovery workout’ in a macrocycle, done on alternating days with very heavy or system/CNS-intensive work (heavy, long timed KB sets, or a lot of squatting and pressing above 90%) and the DB Iso/Hold/Rebound work is done in a completely separate macrocyle, where it would be alternated with lots of heavy, short-duration (15-20 sec) isometrics and isotonics performed near CJC, a la Inno-Sport and DB Hammer.
Did this post fully explain the reasons and methods for use of these isometric protocols? No, absolutely not, and we know it. But, that is largely because, like most folks out there trying to implement this type of work, we are experimenting and trying to find a way to make it all fit in. Also, it has hopefully shed some light on how and why we have implemented these low-load, but high power and duration, ISOs. Give them a try, and please give us your feedback.
18 June 2010
04 June 2010
Shoulder Health for the Bench Specialist
From Coach Hansen:
The shoulder is a wonderful joint, as long as you keep it working like it should. Sadly, the one exercise that can hurt it more often than any other is one that everyone loves doing, the bench press. If you are having pain in your shoulders during or after bench pressing, I hope you will take some advice from a guy who has been there and done that.
First, stop bench pressing for awhile. Just trying to ‘work through the pain’ is the fast track to nowhere. On the plus side, consider that you will lose a lot less strength from taking a few weeks off than you would from the few months to come back from a full-fledged injury.
Next, if at all possible, go see an expert. Rather than a self-diagnosis, or letting that "one guy" at the gym telling you what is wrong, go to a physical therapist or doctor. They should be able to pin-point the problem and give you the correct exercises to remedy the situation. Please remember, I am talking legitimate pain from an injury here, and not soreness. If you are honest with yourself, you will know the difference.
For the lucky ones who don’t have any pain from benching, let’s keep it that way by following a few simple rules. The first, and most important, is technique. This is probably, to be honest, what got you into trouble in the first place. If you have otherwise-healthy shoulders, and benching is causing pain and/or injury, you likely aren’t doing it right. The "body-builder" style of benching, for example, is a recipe for disaster when trained heavy. I'm referring here to benching with the back flat and the elbows flared, trying to get a stretch of the pecs. This not only puts a ‘stretch on the pecs,’ but a ton of stress on the shoulders. When benching significant loads, the shoulder blades should be pulled together, lifting you off the bench slightly, and the elbows should be tucked into the sides. A moderate arch in the back is good as well. Unless you are competing you don’t have to go crazy with the arch, but a little bit is definitely better than none. Dave Tate has a great video on bench press technique available on his website, Elite Fitness Systems. I highly recommend it, and you don’t have to be a full-fledged powerlifter to watch it. Everyone in the gym wants to bench more, and this video will help you with that. [and don’t forget, it’s FREE: http://train.elitefts.com/exercise-index/barbell/bench-press/ ]
Balance in training is second, and is as big a key as technique. A good rule of thumb is for every set of bench presses you do, a set of rows (low pulley, pulldowns, chin ups, bent over, whatever) should be done as well. I, personally, also recommend you include some overhead pressing based on its carryover to benching. A word to the wise here, however: if you are training the bench heavy, like getting ready for a meet, then don’t train the overhead press heavy at the same time. The shoulders are getting a lot of work from the bench, and heavy overhead pressing can be too much for them. This is why, for the same of variety and balanced development, I recommend periodically taking some time off heavy benching and concentrating on upping your overhead press movements. The results are usually happier shoulders and an increase in the bench due to the shoulder support strength and increased triceps drive. Be sure to pay some attention to the rear delts, as well. Rear delt flys, at a minimum, and face pulls are great for this muscle group.
Having dealt with my own shoulder troubles many times (and losing a ton of training time because of it) I have not only seem my own medical professionals and read the textbooks, but scoured the web for information. There is a lot of it, in fact, so much that it can be overwhelming. I will try to list some sites that I have found helpful, in hopes of saving you some time and grief of your own, in a future post.
Happy benching!
The shoulder is a wonderful joint, as long as you keep it working like it should. Sadly, the one exercise that can hurt it more often than any other is one that everyone loves doing, the bench press. If you are having pain in your shoulders during or after bench pressing, I hope you will take some advice from a guy who has been there and done that.
First, stop bench pressing for awhile. Just trying to ‘work through the pain’ is the fast track to nowhere. On the plus side, consider that you will lose a lot less strength from taking a few weeks off than you would from the few months to come back from a full-fledged injury.
Next, if at all possible, go see an expert. Rather than a self-diagnosis, or letting that "one guy" at the gym telling you what is wrong, go to a physical therapist or doctor. They should be able to pin-point the problem and give you the correct exercises to remedy the situation. Please remember, I am talking legitimate pain from an injury here, and not soreness. If you are honest with yourself, you will know the difference.
For the lucky ones who don’t have any pain from benching, let’s keep it that way by following a few simple rules. The first, and most important, is technique. This is probably, to be honest, what got you into trouble in the first place. If you have otherwise-healthy shoulders, and benching is causing pain and/or injury, you likely aren’t doing it right. The "body-builder" style of benching, for example, is a recipe for disaster when trained heavy. I'm referring here to benching with the back flat and the elbows flared, trying to get a stretch of the pecs. This not only puts a ‘stretch on the pecs,’ but a ton of stress on the shoulders. When benching significant loads, the shoulder blades should be pulled together, lifting you off the bench slightly, and the elbows should be tucked into the sides. A moderate arch in the back is good as well. Unless you are competing you don’t have to go crazy with the arch, but a little bit is definitely better than none. Dave Tate has a great video on bench press technique available on his website, Elite Fitness Systems. I highly recommend it, and you don’t have to be a full-fledged powerlifter to watch it. Everyone in the gym wants to bench more, and this video will help you with that. [and don’t forget, it’s FREE: http://train.elitefts.com/exercise-index/barbell/bench-press/ ]
Balance in training is second, and is as big a key as technique. A good rule of thumb is for every set of bench presses you do, a set of rows (low pulley, pulldowns, chin ups, bent over, whatever) should be done as well. I, personally, also recommend you include some overhead pressing based on its carryover to benching. A word to the wise here, however: if you are training the bench heavy, like getting ready for a meet, then don’t train the overhead press heavy at the same time. The shoulders are getting a lot of work from the bench, and heavy overhead pressing can be too much for them. This is why, for the same of variety and balanced development, I recommend periodically taking some time off heavy benching and concentrating on upping your overhead press movements. The results are usually happier shoulders and an increase in the bench due to the shoulder support strength and increased triceps drive. Be sure to pay some attention to the rear delts, as well. Rear delt flys, at a minimum, and face pulls are great for this muscle group.
Having dealt with my own shoulder troubles many times (and losing a ton of training time because of it) I have not only seem my own medical professionals and read the textbooks, but scoured the web for information. There is a lot of it, in fact, so much that it can be overwhelming. I will try to list some sites that I have found helpful, in hopes of saving you some time and grief of your own, in a future post.
Happy benching!
02 June 2010
VOODOO CHILE: Training 'Science'?
From Coach Keen:
As we have stated previously, GMAAC is all about proven sports-specific work, while using science to direct our curiosity in finding new and effective methods.
The focus is on the proven and time-tested methods, however, and we will never let the armchair theorists tell us to do what science says *should* work, as opposed to what we know *does* work.
Once example of a practice some of our coaches employ that doesn’t seem to sit well with the gurus who have never laced up a pair of gloves themselves is the use of Fibonacci sequences in planning out training cycles.
That’s right, the ‘Golden Mean’… The sequence of “Fibonacci Numbers,” for the uninitiated, is 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, etc., with the list being made up of each number being the sum of the two numbers before it. The Golden Ratio/Proportion/Mean is .618, which happens to be what you come up with, after the first few numbers, when you divide any number in the Fibonacci sequence by the one that follows it.
There are many arguments, both for and against, as regards using this mathematical construct in planning out training cycles:
-the proponents say that Fibonacci numbers show up so often in ‘perfection’ and ‘nature’ that they simply cannot be ignored; that is, if these mathematical ratios show up in flower petals, ridges on shells, spiral patterns in water and weather and the proportions of ‘classic’ art and architecture, why wouldn’t it be the case that the natural training and recovery rhythms of the human body are also attuned to this ratio?
-the detractors would tell us that, despite the overwhelming occurrence of this ratio in nature, there is no reason to assume that the “number of days on which you have a training session” is a metric that can or should be controlled by this numerical sequence. They likely believe that, *even if* this Golden Ratio applies somehow to training and recovery, it might just as well be the number of minutes per day you should exercise, or the number of reps to do in a workout, or the number of seconds a muscle should be under tension that this ratio is applied to…there just isn’t any scientific evidence to back up *how* to use Fibonacci numbers in training programming, and in light of that, you should rely on the sports science data that *is* out there regarding training and recovery. [Ed. Note: it is likely that the proponents of this concept, particularly the ‘way out there’ Kool-Aid Drinking Fib-ers, would say all of the above should have the mean applied to them.]
We here at GMAAC agree in part with both camps, and believe that our coaches who use Fibonacci training cycles do so in a way that falls within the common-sense realities that both camps seem to aim at one another.
Here’s why:
1. When you look at the most commonly-used Fibonacci-inspired training cycle, the three-week cycle, what you come up with is five days of ‘rest’ (with the middle day containing an ‘active rest’ workout), 15 straight days of training, and then a 6 day ‘peaking cycle’ actually composed of 2 three-day cycles: three days of rest, then a day of easy training, a day of moderate training, and then your event/peak. This kind of workout schedule ends up, as a practical matter, working out GREAT for us with respect to boxing when someone takes a fight about a month out, and, in fact, looks a lot like the tail-end of a training camp anyway. You come in fresh, you have a rest near the end, and then an easy-to-moderate ramp-up and you compete. These easy and moderate sessions at the end are great when an athlete needs to engage in a little activity for ‘weight management’ purposes, and help your athletes to feel energetic and springy going into a fight, as opposed to sluggish from sitting around for 4 days.
2. As the proponents point out, you can’t ignore the anecdotal data. A number of high-level performers in the sports world have noticed that they do indeed register a peak performance if their training calendar incorporates these numbers and sequences. We have noticed the same, and thus, “it works” so we “keep it.”
3. We like the long stretches of consecutive training days, as this is great when you are working with amateurs and have to consider ‘real-world compliance’… If you sketch out a program for a 14 year-old boxer that includes 4 training days a week for 6 weeks, invariably, between cold season, the Sadie Hawkins dance, being grounded, etc., one of those training sessions a week, on at least two or three of those weeks, is going to slide. That means that all of a sudden you have an athlete who, while supposedly preparing for an event, is ‘not training’ as often as he 'is training', calendar-wise, and that just doesn’t mesh with GMAAC’s long-standing belief that “the best athletes are always the gym rats”…
4. The consecutive training days also allow us to sit well with the sports science theorists and employ block periodization. In today’s world, regardless of the athletic factor examined, we simply do not have the time to employ linear/volume-based periodization schemes, and in the sport of boxing, there are TOO MANY physical attributes that we can (and need to try) to improve to do anything other than always be training *something* on that list “hard,” while at least “maintaining” the other attributes. Using the longer, three-month Fibonacci training block, the ‘guts’ of which has you train for 21 days, rest 3 days, train 34 days, rest 3 days, and then finish with a 21 day block that includes the 3 days of rest and 3 day taper/ramp, is perfect for this. Assuming that the athlete comes into that block with a sufficient base, both skill- and physical attributes-wise (which they do if they train with us…), this is a great set-up to do a three-part block set-up of either 1) General Endurance, 2) Power/Power-Endurance, 3) Fight Prep; or, 1) Aerobic, 2) Anaerobic Lactic, 3) Fight Prep/Anaerobic Alactic. All of these training blocks would have received much more comprehensive, 8-week blocks earlier in the training year, but when a fight is three months out this is a nice way to use shorter blocks and, building upon the base you already established earlier in the year: a) ‘touch’ each of these energy systems and make sure they are primed and ready to go, b) provide some exciting, fresh training that changes every few weeks, and c) use LOTS of sports-specific skills and drills to make sure your fighter is where they need to be physically, and then spend a few weeks on tactical preparation and HARD WORK based on what you know about the opponent.
5. Finally, that last double-three-day-ramp-up at the end would seem to satisfy what the experts currently hold to be a good ‘taper’ or ‘peaking’ strategy. While it used to be held (and still is, by many) that you needed to rest, and rest only, a lot prior to an event, science has backed-up the practice of resting, albeit sparingly, and then leading into an event with some limited volume and intensity work that seems to provide a tonic effect and allow for a peak/supercompensation on event day.
All of this, to reiterate our going-in statement, however, truly boils down to the fact that these training cycles seem to work for us and our athletes. That really is all that matters, and that there seems to be some evidence out there in the world that this *should* work is just gravy. If this is at all interesting, the best, and by far most comprehensive, training resource out there on using the Golden Mean to construct training cycles is “Consistent Winning” by Ron Sandler and Dennis Lobstein, which not only discusses the cycles mentioned about but has sections on holding a peak, training to peak on successive weekends, how to warm-up, etc. Remember, don't rely on luck, so "good planning!"
As we have stated previously, GMAAC is all about proven sports-specific work, while using science to direct our curiosity in finding new and effective methods.
The focus is on the proven and time-tested methods, however, and we will never let the armchair theorists tell us to do what science says *should* work, as opposed to what we know *does* work.
Once example of a practice some of our coaches employ that doesn’t seem to sit well with the gurus who have never laced up a pair of gloves themselves is the use of Fibonacci sequences in planning out training cycles.
That’s right, the ‘Golden Mean’… The sequence of “Fibonacci Numbers,” for the uninitiated, is 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, etc., with the list being made up of each number being the sum of the two numbers before it. The Golden Ratio/Proportion/Mean is .618, which happens to be what you come up with, after the first few numbers, when you divide any number in the Fibonacci sequence by the one that follows it.
There are many arguments, both for and against, as regards using this mathematical construct in planning out training cycles:
-the proponents say that Fibonacci numbers show up so often in ‘perfection’ and ‘nature’ that they simply cannot be ignored; that is, if these mathematical ratios show up in flower petals, ridges on shells, spiral patterns in water and weather and the proportions of ‘classic’ art and architecture, why wouldn’t it be the case that the natural training and recovery rhythms of the human body are also attuned to this ratio?
-the detractors would tell us that, despite the overwhelming occurrence of this ratio in nature, there is no reason to assume that the “number of days on which you have a training session” is a metric that can or should be controlled by this numerical sequence. They likely believe that, *even if* this Golden Ratio applies somehow to training and recovery, it might just as well be the number of minutes per day you should exercise, or the number of reps to do in a workout, or the number of seconds a muscle should be under tension that this ratio is applied to…there just isn’t any scientific evidence to back up *how* to use Fibonacci numbers in training programming, and in light of that, you should rely on the sports science data that *is* out there regarding training and recovery. [Ed. Note: it is likely that the proponents of this concept, particularly the ‘way out there’ Kool-Aid Drinking Fib-ers, would say all of the above should have the mean applied to them.]
We here at GMAAC agree in part with both camps, and believe that our coaches who use Fibonacci training cycles do so in a way that falls within the common-sense realities that both camps seem to aim at one another.
Here’s why:
1. When you look at the most commonly-used Fibonacci-inspired training cycle, the three-week cycle, what you come up with is five days of ‘rest’ (with the middle day containing an ‘active rest’ workout), 15 straight days of training, and then a 6 day ‘peaking cycle’ actually composed of 2 three-day cycles: three days of rest, then a day of easy training, a day of moderate training, and then your event/peak. This kind of workout schedule ends up, as a practical matter, working out GREAT for us with respect to boxing when someone takes a fight about a month out, and, in fact, looks a lot like the tail-end of a training camp anyway. You come in fresh, you have a rest near the end, and then an easy-to-moderate ramp-up and you compete. These easy and moderate sessions at the end are great when an athlete needs to engage in a little activity for ‘weight management’ purposes, and help your athletes to feel energetic and springy going into a fight, as opposed to sluggish from sitting around for 4 days.
2. As the proponents point out, you can’t ignore the anecdotal data. A number of high-level performers in the sports world have noticed that they do indeed register a peak performance if their training calendar incorporates these numbers and sequences. We have noticed the same, and thus, “it works” so we “keep it.”
3. We like the long stretches of consecutive training days, as this is great when you are working with amateurs and have to consider ‘real-world compliance’… If you sketch out a program for a 14 year-old boxer that includes 4 training days a week for 6 weeks, invariably, between cold season, the Sadie Hawkins dance, being grounded, etc., one of those training sessions a week, on at least two or three of those weeks, is going to slide. That means that all of a sudden you have an athlete who, while supposedly preparing for an event, is ‘not training’ as often as he 'is training', calendar-wise, and that just doesn’t mesh with GMAAC’s long-standing belief that “the best athletes are always the gym rats”…
4. The consecutive training days also allow us to sit well with the sports science theorists and employ block periodization. In today’s world, regardless of the athletic factor examined, we simply do not have the time to employ linear/volume-based periodization schemes, and in the sport of boxing, there are TOO MANY physical attributes that we can (and need to try) to improve to do anything other than always be training *something* on that list “hard,” while at least “maintaining” the other attributes. Using the longer, three-month Fibonacci training block, the ‘guts’ of which has you train for 21 days, rest 3 days, train 34 days, rest 3 days, and then finish with a 21 day block that includes the 3 days of rest and 3 day taper/ramp, is perfect for this. Assuming that the athlete comes into that block with a sufficient base, both skill- and physical attributes-wise (which they do if they train with us…), this is a great set-up to do a three-part block set-up of either 1) General Endurance, 2) Power/Power-Endurance, 3) Fight Prep; or, 1) Aerobic, 2) Anaerobic Lactic, 3) Fight Prep/Anaerobic Alactic. All of these training blocks would have received much more comprehensive, 8-week blocks earlier in the training year, but when a fight is three months out this is a nice way to use shorter blocks and, building upon the base you already established earlier in the year: a) ‘touch’ each of these energy systems and make sure they are primed and ready to go, b) provide some exciting, fresh training that changes every few weeks, and c) use LOTS of sports-specific skills and drills to make sure your fighter is where they need to be physically, and then spend a few weeks on tactical preparation and HARD WORK based on what you know about the opponent.
5. Finally, that last double-three-day-ramp-up at the end would seem to satisfy what the experts currently hold to be a good ‘taper’ or ‘peaking’ strategy. While it used to be held (and still is, by many) that you needed to rest, and rest only, a lot prior to an event, science has backed-up the practice of resting, albeit sparingly, and then leading into an event with some limited volume and intensity work that seems to provide a tonic effect and allow for a peak/supercompensation on event day.
All of this, to reiterate our going-in statement, however, truly boils down to the fact that these training cycles seem to work for us and our athletes. That really is all that matters, and that there seems to be some evidence out there in the world that this *should* work is just gravy. If this is at all interesting, the best, and by far most comprehensive, training resource out there on using the Golden Mean to construct training cycles is “Consistent Winning” by Ron Sandler and Dennis Lobstein, which not only discusses the cycles mentioned about but has sections on holding a peak, training to peak on successive weekends, how to warm-up, etc. Remember, don't rely on luck, so "good planning!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
