|
On
January 15th, 2000 I attended the "Legends of the Game" conference at
Eastern Illinois University. Here are my accounts of that conference. I
would like to plug the Charleston Weightlifting Club as they hosted the
conference. Their web address is: http://www.geocities.com/charlestonweightliftingclub/
There
were some great speakers there including Al Vermiel, Brian Oldfield, Jerry
Clayton (Auburn Track coach), Louie Simmons and some of his great lifters,
Bruno Pauletto, Al Oerter, Mike Gattone (Al's Assistant), Jason Patrick
(Illinois Strength Coach) and Paul Fleschler (Indiana University Strength
Coach) among other Olympians and coaches. Here is my account of what I saw
and heard, for anyone who is interested. My comments, if any, will be
clearly noted.
There
was also a high school liftin' meet (I say "liftin' because it was
deadlift, bench press and power clean -- therefore not a powerlifting or
weightlifting meet) as well as a youth weightlifting meet. I enjoyed what
little youth weightlifting I saw because it appeared the meet kept the
safety of the lifter's in mind and there were coaches (I am assuming
coaches) speaking to the lifters throughout their attempts. No leeway to
form or rules was noticed by myself which I believe is a good thing. In
short, the kids were displaying some technique and hopefully when the
coaches were talking to the kids they were explaining what was going on in
their attempts.
The
liftin' was a bit of a disappointment in that safety devices such as
collars and adequate spotting was not emphasized. I saw a couple of kids
(they appeared to be no older than 12 and certainly not strong enough
regardless of their age) spotting a 290 lbs bench press attempt.
Furthermore, the simple notion that it was not a full and sanctioned
powerlifting meet is a travesty to the sport. As for technique, too many
of the high school lifters (actually, it was an open and high school meet)
leaves me to believe the lifters were not very well coached.
It's
unfortunate that, like so many other conferences, two speakers were booked
at the same time and some seminars I wanted to attend overlapped. Because
we do not have track at our program (I coach at Northern Illinois
University) and I've never heard Al or Louie speak, I made them a priority
and did not hear Brian Oldfield's seminars. The first of these he spoke of
his training and overcoming of injuries which would've been interesting.
However, Al Vermiel's seminar was excellent. Al has worked with the 49ers
and Bulls.
Vermiel
set up a "period of development" which began with work capacity or as some
of us may call it "GPP" or simply "getting in shape". Such emphasized on
Anaerobic capacity, body composition, joint mobility and core strength.
>From there, Strength, speed strength and finally speed are developed.
What got me thinking was I have always held "limit strength" as the
foundation of all athletic endeavors. While I still believe this to be
true, certainly I cannot deny that if an athlete isn't in shape even to
develop that, it is first to be addressed.
One
overwhelming theme in literally all the speakers I heard was the
development of "core strength". That is, the development of that area
between your knees and armpits. Vermiel, spent considerable time on this
and had a series of exercises which, while not totally unique, certainly
interested me. With simply the bar, he had a series of exercises (upright
rows, muscle snatches, squats, bent rows, etc.) which he used to develop
such developmental "core" strength.
Vermiel
also spoke about limit strength and it's unimportance to athletics. He did
note a general need to have it, but seemed disgusted with the current
trend of "record boards". He noted that in general, an athlete should
squat 2 times his bodyweight and their clean should be about 60% of that.
This has always intrigued me for some reason: the question being "when do
diminishing returns begin?" Later, I eavesdropped on a conversation
between him and Bruno Pauletto and asked more about it. It seemed to me
that while he did acknowledge it, even so it wasn't that important. In
short, just because that's what the should be capable of doing, it doesn't
mean they should actually do it.
I
don't know if it was intended, but Vermiel said something that set the
stage for a confrontation. He stated he was upset at coaches who often
boast of their accomplishments. This is a trend I've seen over the last
couple of years in that coaches are realizing that they simply facilitate
accomplishment, not force it. (I must admit I say "over the last couple of
years" and I've only been in the field for 9 years. I would think coaches
realized this before I did) The stage being set was a roundtable between
Al, Louie Simmons and Pauletto (who was a no show for the roundtable).
Without knowing about Al's comments, Louie began by introducing himself
and listing the some 25 world champions and number of lifters who bench or
squat "X" number of pounds. Al took it well in not objecting to this
publicly, but clearly he was a bit upset.
During
the roundtable, the following topics and answers were noted:
Frequency
of Lifts (workouts)
Al:
It is dependent on the total volume. Al spoke of counting weekly totals of
repetitions. The lifts per workout would be dependent on the weekly totals
and THAT number should be kept low enough to keep the nervous system
sharp, yet enough to provide a training effect.
Louie:
Louie prescribed one "dynamic" day and one "max day a week (I will further
elaborate later). He mentioned that GPP was the key and also spoke of core
strength. Louie threw out a comment that he had never seen a great athlete
who didn't have a thick midsection. I couldn't help but thinking of a
defensive back or receiver looking like Louie! However, the emphasis on
core or midsection strength was again made.
Variation
Al:
Younger athletes need less variation to force a training effect to happen.
Teach the basics and stay away from "magic reps/sets" schemes.
At
this point, let me clarify some information Al had given earlier and some
he gave at this point. He did note earlier the positive benefits of a
variety of movement patterns for young athletes when he noted gymnastics
and martial arts as excellent activities for youths. His point was that
often times programs are switched too often. The discs of the spine are
the last to be developed, according to Vermiel, and often times programs
aren't followed long enough for this adaptation to be allowed. Whether he
was speaking of actual athletic planning or actual exercises within a
program, I'm not sure. But it is clear to me he believed not enough time
was being spent on basic movements and again, development of the core.
Louie:
Louie stated that the abs must be developed and advocated dragging a sled
with your feet and hands to help build core strength. While not
necessarily answering the question, I came away from the conference
believing that Louie did like some variation, but had his staples which
included box squats, benches, towel benches (he used 2x6's instead), glute
ham work (including his reverse hyper machine) and various rows for the
back and rear delts.
Recovery
Al:
Al stated over and over that elite competition is meant not to be made a
career and that there are too many offseason leagues. He stated that there
was not enough recovery allowed with athletes and deplored the summer
leagues as well as spring football practices.
Louie:
Louie stated that there were two dynamic days and two max effort days.
Allow 40 seconds rest for dynamic days and about 1:30 for max effort days.
Obviously
a contradiction, and one that was again contradicted when I asked the
question again to some of his folks and other's who attended his seminars.
Unfortunately, Louie had an emergency and had to skip the second day.... I
never got the chance to ask him questions after reviewing my notes.
Louie
did make it clear he trained 13 days a week and 6 of them were his core
sled workouts. From there, I assume a dynamic squat workout, a dynamic
bench workout, a dynamic deadlift workout, and a max workouts for each
(two for bench). Too bad Louie couldn't be around the second day so I
could clarify.
Al:
Noted that when resting heart rate gets 6-10 beats over normal, perhaps
more recovery is needed.
Force
Production:
Al:
When your force production decreases 10% during lifts, time to call it a
day, so to speak. Louie: Louie likes using large rubber bands to help vary
force production (much in the way chains are used). They help eliminate
declarative forces needed. Al: Al interjected by saying this may be fine
for strength development, but during running and plyometric exercises, it
is not a useable training technique. Louie: Louie rebutted by noting great
improvements in vertical jumps with his techniques and stated he did 120
fast lifts per week and 16 max lifts per week.
I'd
like to back up and mention something comments that Vermiel had noted.
Interesting thing, The seminar notes state that Al is the brother of Dick
Vermiel... Interesting. Not relevant, but interesting.
First,
Vermiel on two occasions noted that the NSCA is thought he was too
opinionated. I'm not sure what significance that has. The NSCA has been
accused of that as well. Perhaps it was a thing that has been bugging Al
for a while and he simply wanted to vent some frustration to that comment.
Anyway...
As
I noted, Vermiel was bothered by the fact that there are too many summer
leagues and that athletes are playing their games (noting basketball, but
volleyball also comes to mind) and not allowing for proper training. Al:
"I'm playing in a summer league coach." "Ok, there goes the plyometric
training." This posed some interesting thoughts....
After
reading Siff and Verkhoshansky's work for years, it's clear to me that
plyometrics aren't meant to be done year round. Their text seems to state
that you engage in this training very briefly and not before a significant
competition. In an unrelated exchange of conversation, Jim Kielbaso (who
was not at the conference, and is the strength and conditioning coach at
Detroit -- Mercy) related to me that his guys and gals are playing year
round and when he did plyos, injury rates increased. Northern Illinois'
head strength coach, John Binkowski, had similar comments. I cannot help
but to conclude from this variety of sources that if basketball players,
volleyball players or any other jumping athletes are competing in
organized events, or even pick up games, they are indeed doing plyometric
training and no more is needed. I've always believed in 20-40 jumps twice
per week (10-20 if they are depth jumps). A game may already provide this
and perhaps exceed it. I think plyos are great, but if they are already
doing them, perhaps you can rest easy with them in your organized
training.
I
next heard Mike Gattone (Vermiel's assistant) and Paul Flesher (Indiana)
speak on basketball training. Good stuff, but not too much different from
Al's seminar. It was good to hear it again, but the only notes I picked up
were a Bulls warm up routine which included various skipping and slides
followed by some lunge walks and other calisthenics. EJ "Doc" Kreis (my
mentor at Middle Tennessee and now strength coach at U. of Colorado) once
told me when I was warming up MTSU's basketball team to bring them into
lifting in a full sweat. This routine was not greatly different from what
Doc had me doing and it's pretty effective. It doubles as an excellent way
to get some unique movements into your program.
Louie
was next in the weight room. Louie certainly demonstrates that he knows
how to get athletes strong and has some rather unique ideas.... But if
they work, they work! Louie first touted the greatest training footwear
possible: Chuck Taylors! I'm not sure if I agree. I've always felt that
the harder the sole, the better (provided it was comfortable). However,
certainly it's better than a pair of air cusioned basketball shoes.
Louie's
second piece of advice was to never squat down, squat back. He noted that
box squats were an excellent teaching technique and the majority of
squatting he did was on a box (in fact, my notes indicate ALL squatting is
done on a box). While he did not look to embarrass anyone, he asked for a
volunteer to do unweighted box squats. This individual (a gent looking
around 6'5" and 250 lbs) had trouble controlling his sit. Louie (again,
without embarrassing the fella) pointed this out and (I believe)
rightfully so. Squatting correctly isn't easy, and if you can't properly
sit on a box, you've got some things to work on.
Much
has been written on Louie's 50-60% of 1RM... Louie acknowledged this but
then somewhat wrote it off as just a general range when he stated he was
looking for speed of movement. No emphasis on cadence, just an eyeball's
judgment. He also de-emphasized eccentric movement. Good ideas, both, in
my book.
Louie
emphasized good mornings and glute hams for sprinters.
Louie
then stated that there are three methods to lifting a weight: Dynamic
(meaning speed lifting as noted above), Max effort (1-3 reps done heavy)
and reps to failure and noted he used them all at various times. I was
still very confused on his ideas of total training volume, but after
talking to my associate Matt Magnum (my co-assistant strength coach and
quite a good powerlifter himself), who spent a week with Louie, things
were clarified. My suspicions which were listed in part one are confirmed
and he does his assistance work to concentric fatigue.
Interestingly
enough, Louie's max day is not in done in an actual squat, bench or
deadlift, but often in partials or other movements.
Louie
commented on doing assistance exercises right up to the competition. I
debated Matt Magnum on this (neither of our minds were changed). Louie's
argument was that within 10 days, you are going to lose 10% of your
strength. I don't believe research shows this (not if you've been training
hard all along) and if you dump the assistance work, the benching,
squatting and deadlifting will keep you strong enough for the 10 days.
Furthermore, allowing type IIB fibers to form is certainly a possibility
and should be considered. How many of you have taken a week layoff only to
find yourself stronger for your first workout (or meet)? Still, Louie has
his opinions and those are mine.
After
a break, Louie commented on benching. I now give you the secret to Louie's
benching and how he's produced so many 500 and 600 lb benchers. Louie
comments that too many have been taught to bench from their chest to over
their face. This, according to Louie is wrong. It should be straight up.
To demonstrate, he had his assistant do a bench both ways, and clearly,
the bar travels farther when you push it over your face. But here's the
background info. His assistant sucked in his gut during the bench during
the "over your face lift" and puffed it out during the straight up bench!
In short, bench press #1 was 20 inches. Bench press #2 was 6 inches! It
was a faulty display... But something interesting did come to me... Hey,
if you can puff out that belly (and both Marty and Louie CAN puff), move
the bar less inches, and the judge says it's ok... So what?
But
let me better relate... The rules of benching state "straighten the arms".
I think you may lose some power this way, but if you can manage it and
deal with it, who cares? Certainly it's less work and leverage is better.
To
change gears, at some point during the seminar, Louie made a very
important statement which I hoped he would've further commented on: "Find
your athletes needs and work them." If there was a strength coaching
creed, this should be included!
Louie
had some great advice concerning other matters. Rear delt work is a
must... triceps are a key part in benching.... There was more on sled
pulling including some interesting ideas on upper body sled pulling. There
was the notion that training the lats should be done by row exercises
instead of pulldowns.
My
comments on Louie: Clearly, he has some good ideas and has put some
thought in transferring his ideas over to other sports besides
powerlifting. Furthermore, his ideas on powerlifting are somewhat unique.
His speaking skills are all over the place as dictating my notes on his
seminar was most difficult. However, you can't argue with his success. And
his speaking skills, There was a need for his format to be open. As a
public speaker myself, I know how hard it is and with his topics, he
jumped around -- and it fit his style. He did a great job.
However,
I must note the issue between developing max strength and explosive
strength. Louie seems to think his methods are best for both. Either Louie
is a genius or he is wrong. So which is it? Dr. Squat once commented that
he had not done a clean for some time and after training for powerlifting
and trying a clean, he bested his previous max. This led him to conclude
that getting God-awful strong has it's merits! But in every situation, is
this always so? I think NOT! I further believe the 7 "Laws of Training" to
be true!
I
noted that Al Vermiel downsized the importance of max strength for certain
athletes and I tend to side with him. However, there is something to said
for max or limit strength. However, the gap (Al says 60% or better)
between limit and explosive strength should not be allowed to increase. I
agree with him. Al also stated that limit strength has it's limitations
(no pun intended). I agree, but I also agree that if you "raise the roof"
of limit strength, you can "raise the roof" of explosive strength.
Louie
thinks he can do both and offers only case studies. I will accept is that
perhaps a meeting of philosophies will provide better results. If limit
strength is lacking (as I believe it is in so many of today's youth --
despite their incredible 300 lb bench presses at age 16) then your ability
to develop safe and sufficient explosive strength will never reach optimum
levels. In my mind, a melting of both philosophies must be realized. Al's
missing one boat and Louie another. Or perhaps I'm missing several boats!
Anyway, that's why I went... To try to catch one of them if I was missing
a boat. I hope the various basketball coaches and track coaches (and
anyone else) realizes the notion of cohesion of training. Somehow, I'm not
sure this happened.
Louie
did a great job! After reviewing my notes, I had much to ask him and
perhaps we could've talked some liftin'! Louie noted his work with the
Seahawks and the Packers but did not expound on them. I cannot help but to
think these teams still employed strength coaches and I haven't seen how
his methods fit in with the demands of football. But one thing is clear:
Louie is a man to be listened to.
Bruno
Pauletto was the next speaker I heard. He began speaking about resistance
running. He recommended not using so much resistance that it "slows the
runner down". He noted a 10% reduction in top running speed was enough and
anymore than that was too much.
He
then discussed stride length and frequency and the benefits of overspeed
training to optimize both. Rubber cords, down hill running (slight grades)
and parachutes (when you remove the chute during running it produces a
small burst of speed) are ways to produce overspeed.
Just
a quick note on stride length which was not covered in Pauletto's speech.
I have often wondered if increasing stride length is always a good idea.
Tellez, Ward and Dintiman spoke of this in their book Sport Speed. It
seems that there is an optimum stride length, but speed isn't continuously
increased with increases in stride length -- not always. Overstriding can
lead to slower running speeds. On the other hand, if the force per
footstep propels the body farther each time, stride length can be
increased without a decrease in speed. Sport speed reflects this belief
with a table and series of equations. If there is a fault with their
equations, it is that total body height is used and not leg length, which
may be a more accurate indication.
Pauletto
recommended using sprint training before lifting, plyometrics or
conditioning -- or better yet, on non lifting days. He recommended 3 times
per week and a total of 18 sprints (8 with a parachute).
Pauletto
next discussed plyometrics. Some factors should be taken into
consideration including the height of jumps, age, weight, landing surface
and experience.
A
variety of jumps should be used 2-3 times per week. Beginners should do no
more than 40 jumps and more advanced athletes can use up to 120 jumps per
session. He noted that when quick foot contact jumps are used (as in depth
jumps), 4-8 jumps per set should be used. He also stressed plenty of
recovery time and making each jump count ("quality, not quantity").
The
use of medicine balls was discussed. Beginners should use lighter balls,
basic movements and 6-8 sets of 4-8 throws. Advanced athletes should use
heavier balls, more complex movements and 8-12 sets of 4-8 throws.
My
personal opinions are that the jumps prescribed may be a bit too much,
especially when other training is taken into consideration. It seems that
Siff and Verkhoshansky agreed when they wrote an article in The Fitness
and Sports Review International (28-1, 1993) called Understanding
Plyometrics. The majority of this article discussed what is and isn't
plyometrics (or jump training):
"No
distinction is made between maximal and submaximal plyometrics (and how
they are produced), nor is the concurrent and sequential prescription of
plyometric and other forms of training discussed in any depth. For
example, both books [speaking of Chu's work and that of Radcliffe and
Farantinos] advocate sessions with over 100 repetitions of plyometric
movements, sometimes combined with resistance training.....This volume of
maximal plyometrics (unlike sub-maximal plyometrics) is neither feasible
nor safe for any athlete."
I
suppose it's comes down to if all the jumps are maximal or not.
Personally, I feel that 40 jumps is the maximum for a single session and
even less if they are depth jumps (less than 20).
Anyway,
Pauletto spoke of agility as being defined as "foot quickness". Agility
drills will teach timing, rhythm, balance and body control. Agility
ladders, dot drills and cones can be used to develop agility.
Clearly,
other sources have expanded Pauletto's definition as being more than just
"foot quickness". Baechle (Essentials of Strength and Conditioning)
defines agility as "the ability to change the direction of the body or
body parts rapidly under control." Kreis and Costello (Sports Agility)
define it as, "...the ability to change direction without the loss of
speed, strength, balance or body control. There is a direct correlation
between improved agility and the development of athletic timing, rhythm
and movement." The ISSA definition is "your ability to combine limit
strength, starting strength, explosive strength, and dynamic balance in
performing a series of directional changes in rapid succession." So, while
foot quickness (or limb quickness), timing, rhythm, balance and body
control are part of agility, there are other factors to consider. I firmly
believe agility ladders and dot drills can help foot speed, but perhaps
the best method for improving agility is the use of cones. Funny thing, I
can remember one agility training session I had which involved running
around Bob's coat, Steve's hat, Dave's back pack....
Jerry
Clayton (Auburn Track coach) was the final speaker I heard. I must say
that while I enjoyed all the speakers, Vermiel and Clayton were highlights
for me. He began by stating that high school track athletes generally have
very poor core and stabilizer strength. He further stated that too many
coaches try to correct technique when it's actually an issue of poor
strength. For example, many athletes have problems balancing on one leg
(much less doing a one legged squat) which can lead to ankle and lower leg
injury.
Clayton
presented a video which showed a lot of calisthenics movements (push ups,
sit ups, wrestler's bridges push ups -- feet and hands, not on the head --
one leg squats, bodyweight squats, back arches, pull ups, etc) as well as
medicine ball drills and sub maximum plyometrics
The
medicine ball drills were both of an upper and lower body style. There
were overhead throws, chest passes and many other upper body movements,
but the lower body movements interested me most. The major point in these
movements was "pushing" the ball and not kicking it. Some examples were
front pushes (as if you were kicking it) -- one legged and two legged
which involved a small hop, side pushes, and one particular drill involved
sitting with your inner thigh facing upward, on the ground and tossing the
ball in the air. This would be effective in training the inner thigh. He
had another exercise which he called a Pike shoot which involved pinching
the ball with your feet and throwing the ball over your head while laying
on your back.
Some
interesting core (torso) exercises were presented. The athletes laid on
the ground and then raised onto their heels and elbows. From there they
did simple leg lifts. Similar movements were done facing sideways (on one
elbow) and belly down (elbows and toes). I tried them and they are not as
easy as they may seem. Certainly these can be useful for lower level
athletes, and upper level athletes may still have use for them.
Various
hurdle exercises were also presented. Conventional hurdle hops were shown.
Hurdle walks were presented as well (simply stepping over high hurdles).
Regular staples in a hurdler's program, perhaps they have use for other
athletes as well. One unique twist was the use of sandbags. The athletes
were asked to throw one sandbag over their shoulder and perform the hurdle
walks. I believe this will help build the core strength (dynamic core
strength) and that it may be a good idea to alternate shoulders. I would
think Clayton thinks so too, but he didn't mention this...
Clayton
related an interesting practice of combining lifting and sprinting
exercises. He'd have his athletes do a set of squats or cleans (I imagine
other full body movements could be used) and immediately go out and run a
sprint. Clayton's set up of facilities made this easy as he had weights in
his locker room which was just outside his track. This reminded me of
using complexes. Let me clarify that I'm not speaking of Vermiel's "core
complex" method, but rather a complex something like the following: 3
power cleans followed by 3 front squats, again followed by 3 jerks. One
belief I heard long ago was that this would help bridge the gap between
limit and speed strength. If this concept is possible, perhaps this is a
better method, especially for sprinters.
Clayton
then presented a full page of sprinter's circuits. He invited folks to
SASE him and he'd provide a copy. However, I did manage to jot down his
first circuit:
1.
Tuck jumps in a sand pit (all jumps and squats were done in a sand pit).
Emphasis on speed. 2. 100 meter sprints x 2. 30 seconds rest and each
sprint done in 14-15 seconds. 3. Split leg jumps. 4. 100 meter sprints x 2
(see above) 5. Body squats (he called them prisoner squats) 6. the sprints
again.
No
mention of reps... I'd guess 10 is a safe number.
His
last topic was plyometrics with the only noted statements (meaning, the
only ones I thought to write down) being an emphasis on general to
specific and the notion that plyometrics should not be done year round. He
also noted another circuit which involved doing a sprint followed by one
set of three jumps.
Later,
after the seminar, I introduced myself and thanked him for a job well
done. I told him where I coached and he was delighted to tell me that he
attended Northern Illinois (where I coach)! Back then NIU had an excellent
track program and he verbally expressed his displeasure to the university
when the program was discontinued. Good to see an NIU alumn out there!
What
I especially liked about his approach was a "back to basics" style. A
strength and conditioning coach cannot use all of his methods and
techniques in his or her program. But I'm assuming that these techniques
are used on HIS time. I only have so much time to get other stuff in. But
certainly some of them are now being incorporated into warm ups and "ab
routines" -- which I now refer to as "core routines". Other ideas sounded
useful and I'm storing them away for future use. Particularly, my warm up
now includes double and single leg jump roping (it was there anyway),
lunge walks, side lunge walks and single leg squats (which I've used
before, but in a different way). Right now, I'm allowing athletes to hold
onto something, but will soon wean them off and ask them to do them free
standing. This will help leg strength, but I like the idea that the simple
act of balancing may help ankle strength. My core routine includes the
elbow and foot stuff, 3 sets x 10 seconds each way. Right now I'm just
asking them to hold the position, but will later incorporate leg lifts.
Incidentally, I saw this used earlier when I was at Umass where Coach Bob
Otrando used them (without leg lifts). I am also including reverse Russian
twists and if they want anymore abs after that, more power to them.
Some
General Conference Comments:
The
first day went well, but there was some disorganization the second day. No
one knew where seminars would be held and there was much displeasure with
Louie Simmons leaving early. I was disappointed in that Louie was going to
take one of his great athletes (Dave Tate) through a bench workout. There
were others who were equally upset. Still, family matters take precedence
and I understand. One problem I saw is not uncommon with conferences with
duel tracts (The NSCA sports specific conference comes to mind). Seminars
overlapped and at times folks (including myself) had to skip a potentially
great presentation or had to leave or arrive before/after the seminar's
time allotment was up. I'm sure Conference directors have noted this and
consider this a "necessary evil" and frankly, I have no solution. It's
just a shame because I truly believe I missed some great
information.
However,
the Charleston Weightlifing Club and the Legends of the Game staff did an
excellent job of bringing in some amazing folks. It was literally a "who's
who" of track and field greats and strength coaches. Save day two's
unforeseen problems (which were pulled off without a real problem), they
ran it well. I must say, I do plan to attend next year if the lineup is
even close to being as impressive as it was this year.
I
would also like to point out that a USWA coaches certification course was
offered. I have very little information on what is offered, but I did see
of their instruction included "hands on" training. I am not certified with
that organization, but am considering it next year. I know the movements
and know how to teach them, but hey, I can always learn more
I
was walking down the hall next to an unknown track and field coach. We
began casual conversation... Somewhere during that conversation I
expressed my interest in Track and Field even though only Cross Country is
the only related sport offered at my school (there is talk of picking up
the program again at NIU). I told him that Track and Field is the basics
of all athletics along with weightlifting and gymnastics. Gymnastics is
the quintessential display of athletic ability in many (not all) aspects.
Agility, strength, speed, flexibility, balance and endurance (to a point)
are involved. The other two (weightlifting and T&F) answer the
following questions: who can run faster, throw farther, jump
higher/farther and lift more weight. It is no wonder T&F was once
referred to as "athletics". This unknown coach was in complete agreement.
This
leads to the "age - old debate of what is the greatest sport". I think
it'd be wise to include the WSM events as well as the combat sports
(Wrestling, Karate, Judo) into the mix. There are other sports such as
skiing, rowing, swimming, biking and skating which also answer the
question of who's the fastest (my apologies to similar sports that I may
have left out). Realizing that these are strong opinions, I'd like to
state it doesn't make baseball, football, basketball, hockey, volleyball,
soccer or rugby any less demanding. However, the basics of athletics are:
racing, fighting, throwing, jumping, moving and lifting. Games offer other
dimensions of strategy and thinking (not that other sports don't,
especially combat sports. But clearly they are more important in games).
I'm a bit off topic, so let me bring it back in focus. The importance of
Track and Field (which was half the agenda in this conference) is worthy
of any strength coaches knowledge. I can't use all the techniques as they
don't always apply to all sports. After all, a great 100 meter speed is
nice for football, but in football, you have 11 other grumpy guys trying
to bury you and 10 compadres trying to save your butt! As well, 100
meters isn't always what football is all about (even though I saw the
Oakland Raiders claim every play is designed to reach the end zone) -- it
rarely is and I believe that any team which can guarantee 3.34 yards per
down is destined for success! Still, there's some stuff that can be used
in all athletics which is found in Track and Field knowledge. Strength
coaches must often be a master of all sports. Perhaps "jack of all trades
and master of none (or just a few)" is a better term for us. Track and
field is the "jack" of almost all athletics.
| 
