In part 1 of this series I talked a little bit about this concept of the “shock training cycle”. This of course led to some debate on the internet (if it weren’t for debate we might not have an internet!) regarding my use of the phrase “shock training cycle”. Purists of this concept are very strict on the application of this type of training as it is incredibly taxing on the body and typically only used for athletes at the most elite levels of training (to read further about this check out Supertraining by Siff & Verkhoshansky). I cannot disagree with that as I have spent a long time reading Russian training theory and this is the most known approach of shock training and Verkhoshansky did coin the phrase (I believe).

However, my application of this is a bit different as I think of it more from the idea that any sort of short, 1-2 week, increase in volume and/or intensity, as discussed in part 1, would be successful in over stressing the system, “shocking” the system if you will, provided that the right amount of stimulus is applied and the right amount of recovery, following that phase, is given to allow the body to restore itself from that block of training and new fitness gains to manifest.

This is what we could call “concentrated loading” as we concentrate a very high amount of work in one single area (one physiological quality) in order to force an improvement. Thus, the approach I am suggesting could be used with a variety of athletes (not just the most elite trained) and over a variety of different physiological qualities (not just strength/power) provided that the right amount of work is chosen for the athlete and the quality being trained is specific to the needs of their sport.

The Cost of Doing Business

When we train we get two outcomes – fitness & fatigue. We gain some fitness and get faster, stronger, more conditioned, etc. We also gain some fatigue and break down a little bit (remember, training is a stress that the body needs to recover from). Together, these outcomes can be represented graphically in the Fitness-Fatigue Model:

As I like to say with training, “There is always a cost of doing business”. When we train a lot, we may have a large spike in fitness but the cost of doing business is also higher, thus we end up burning out a lot quicker. If we train with a more long term approach in mind, slow and steady over time, we accrue less fatigue and fitness gains can keep being made. When we apply this brief period of concentrated loading there will be a very large cost of doing business, fatigue will rise higher than fitness (causing the athlete to report a greater amount of fatigue and perhaps even a bit of decrease in performance); however, once the recovery phase is performed and fatigue dissipates the new gains in performance made will be revealed and the athlete’s level of preparation (seen as the middle line in the graph above) will rise higher.

By taking the long term approach to training (lowest cost of doing business) we can now see that during certain weeks of the year an application of this concentrated load to a specific physiological quality can be very beneficial, force us to have increased gains in fitness, and perhaps help us to break through some plateaus. A cautionary note: A lot of people want to use these high intensity methods all the time, year round. Unfortunately, this tends to break the body down a significant amount and lead to burnout and overtraining. Additionally, if used too frequently there is less potential benefit when we attempt to apply a concentrated phase of work as the body has already adapted to that training stimulus – the stimulus is no longer novel.

Concentrated Loading For Conditioning

In 2013, Ronnestad and colleagues conducted a study using a block periodization type format over 4 weeks on endurance trained cyclists. There were two training groups who were matched for training volume:

• Block Training Group
  -The block training group performed 1 week of very concentrated aerobic intervals. During this week they trained 5 times alternating each day between intervals of 6x5min @ 88-100% max HR; Rest = 2.5min and intervals of 5x6min @ 88-100% max HR; Rest = 3min.  The following three weeks consisted of only 1 high intensity workout per week (one of the workouts from week one) and the rest of the week they performed high volume/low intensity training in one of two aerobic training zones: (1) 60-82% max HR; (2) 83-87% max HR.
• Traditional Training Group– The traditional training group performed two high intensity training sessions per week for four weeks (they did one session of 6x5min and one session of 5x6min with the intensity and rest interval parameters being the same as the block training group) and the rest of the week they performed high volume/low intensity training in one of two aerobic training zones: (1) 60-82% max HR; (2) 83-87% max HR.

Key Findings

• The block training group reported a greater amount of perceived heaviness in their legs during week one. However, this dissipated over the remaining three weeks of the program.
• The block training group saw greater improvements in VO2max, Max Aerobic Power, and Power Output following their one week of high volume/high intensity training.

Take Home Points & Application

Only one week of the high volume/high intensity training was needed to force an improvement in the cyclists’ fitness. As I discussed in part 1 – whether you call it “shock training”, concentrated loading, or block periodization (I am not too worried about the naming convention that surrounds such things) – these training phases are best utilized when they are brief, 1-2 weeks, with higher intensity, volume, and/or frequency. Subjectively, during this 1 week phase the athletes reported greater heaviness in their legs, which is typical during a week with that much intensity and frequency, and this heaviness dissipated during the following 3 week period (and the athletes also saw performance improvements).

Following the high intensity/frequency week the athletes only performed one high intensity session per week. This could be thought of as a a way of stimulating the system following the high intensity block so that continued improvements can be made at a much lower cost of doing business (lower training volume and frequency of the high intensity work). I do wonder what would have happened if after this four week phase (1 week of concentrated loading and 3 weeks of low intensity with one stimulation workout) the athletes then took a 7-10 day restoration phase? Perhaps the fitness gains would have been even higher?

The traditional training group did a more mixed approach with some high intensity workouts and some high volume workouts throughout the week. I don’t think this concurrent approach is wrong or bad and I would hope that people don’t interpret the study to be saying that this approach is inferior. I believe there are times when this sort of training structure can be helpful and warranted. Typically, when we are in a phase of training where the goal is to build the athlete’s fitness I program high intensity workouts, similar to what was used in this study, once every 7-10 days, which usually ends up being every fourth or fifth conditioning workout. I find that this is enough to keep the system stimulated and provide us a good period of time between high intensity workouts that, when they are performed, we have a chance to look at any KPIs we are trying to improve upon – it is sometimes amazing to see how much higher volumes of submaximal work can improve maximal efforts when programmed properly. We then use the 1-2 week phase of concentrated loading as we approach certain periods of the year to get the most out of those training methods.

This sort of concentrated loading can be very powerful. It is important not to overdo it and risk burnout or overtraining. A less is more approach is best utilized here. Thus, if you think about something like a 10-12 week training cycle this week of concentrated loading/shock might be used somewhere towards the end of the training cycle a week or two prior to testing or competition, depending on how long it takes the athlete to recover (and each athlete is a little different so some trial and error may be needed first). Athletes who are more fit and have a larger training background may be able to tolerate two 1-week phases within the 10-12 week training cycle (for example in week 5 and week 10) provided that this training cycle. Finally, if volume/frequency are slowly built up (which is the opposite of what they did in the study, opting to go straight to the one week phase of with high amounts of work) the cycle can be drawn out over a longer period of time and can have greater undulations in it.

The idea of a “shock training cycle” or “shock week” is certainly nothing new. Many authors have talked about this concept and this concept can often be found in some of the Russian texts.

The idea behind it is that you set up training so that during a certain period of time you actually increase the intensity and/or volume and/or frequency as a means of “shocking” your system into a new level of fitness. Of course this sort of approach comes with a price as the body gets beat down by the frequency/volume/intensity of training and oftentimes the improved level of fitness is not noticeable until after a restoration period (typically 1-2 weeks but definitely depends on the individual athlete and the amount of training done in the shock phase) where the fatigue that has accrued during  training can dissipate.

This first article will discuss some concepts I feel are fundamental to setting up a shock training cycle. Following parts of this series will look at some research around this concept and talk about some practical ways I have applied it before for conditioning and strength training.

What are you trying to improve?

As you look to set up this training cycle or training week you need to first ask yourself what it is you are trying to enhance. Because there is a high amount of intensity and frequency directed at one key quality during this training phase it is difficult to try and focus on multiple qualities. Thus, you need to be very clear about what it is you want to improve so that everything else can be minimized and/or dropped from the program during this time. I know people get very nervous about taking things out of their program but the good news is that this sort of training phase will only last 1-2 weeks (depending on how much frequency of training you choose to prescribe) so you wont risk losing the other qualities you have trained and the benefits that you are hoping to make in the key quality should be something that will improve your capacity for sport (IE, this should be a key quality that is directly linked to the physiological needs of the sport you compete in).

Make sure you are fit!

This sort of training is demanding on the body. There is no need to rush to this type of training if you do not have a solid base level of fitness and are able to tolerate it.

Variables to manipulate

There are a few variables that you can manipulate when performing the shock training cycle:

• Intensity – Intensity needs to be high during the shock training cycle. During this time you will be pushing your body and working over 90% for a majority of your training sessions.
• Frequency – Training frequency is a key variable to manipulate during this sort of training phase. Unlike a more normal training phase where the frequency of your hard/intense workouts is spread out with days of lower or medium intensity between them, during this phase you will try and repeat high intensity sessions with greater frequency (often 2-3 days in a row). While this does create a higher amount of fatigue on the system it raises fitness as well and once that fatigue dissipates, as indicated above, that new fitness level can then be displayed.
• Volume – The final variable that can be manipulated is training volume. I put this one last as I find, from experience, that the two variables above are the most important. Generally, if you are training with that high of an intensity and performing frequent workouts you may find that you don’t require a ton of training volume to get what you want from the program. Where volume may come into play is during the weekly workouts. Because the frequency is high you may choose to manipulate volume, for example, day 1 may be a high amount of training volume and day 2 (the next day) may be similar amount of intensity but a slightly lower training volume. Additionally, volume can be manipulated based on how the athlete is feeling or testing (if you are monitoring certain factors of readiness) and volume can be dialed down or up from there. This would become particularly helpful if you were stretching the training phase out to a second week. If the athlete is fit enough (see point 2 above) then they should be able to handle several workouts in the first week and recover well.

Looking ahead to part 2

That is a little bit of background on the “shock training cycle” and some of the things I think about when using it. A lot of times people want to be high intensity year round, whether it is with their strength training or with their conditioning. Unfortunately this type of approach tends to break you down and also tends to place a ceiling on the amount of improvement you can get when you actually do ramp up the intensity and frequency in one of these shock training cycles. It is analogous to having the stereo on volume 10 all the time. Eventually it just gets annoying and you try and tune it out (or break the stereo). By being methodical in your approach you may get more benefits from your training program. The last thing I’ll say is that this stuff works only in certain phases of the year, mainly the off-season. In-season training is a pretty different animal and trying to do something like this in-season, when competition is the most important thing, is foolish. Thus, we tend to take this approach in the mid to late off-season once the guys have been training a bunch (typically 8-10 weeks of training leading up to this where they perform a concurrent training program with volumes of different qualities being manipulated based on what they need to work on in that phase) and their fitness levels are high and they are ready to tolerate it. The next parts in this series will look at some of the research (mainly done using energy system training) and I’ll provide some of my own ideas for using this with conditioning and/or strength training.

Last week we had a great Facebook discussion on the wall of Daniel Martinez, Director of Strength and Conditioning for Entheos Athletics (a strength and conditioning company in San Antonio, TX that specializes in youth strength and conditioning and particularly the development of volleyball athletes), regarding some of the circuit training ideas used by great track and field coaches like Dan Pfaff.

The discussion was centered around the use of FUNdamental circuits as a way of developing certain qualities or competencies. I talked about some of this stuff in an article a year ago, Developing Requisite Competencies, and an article from 2011, Circuit Training Methods. Jeremy Frisch, owner of Achieve Performance in Clinton, MA, was a contributor to the discussion and I am constantly reminded of the article and ideas he shared in my blog back in 2011 on a similar topic.

From the discussion I thought I would share some examples of what I call Field Circuits.

Field Circuits

Goal

The goal of our field circuits is two fold:

1. To work on fundamentals and learning of basic tasks which can be taken advantage of in later training phases.
2. To provide the athlete with some circulatory work in an athletic environment and with tasks that are (a) more similar to what they will be doing in their sport and (b) not as boring as sitting on a stationary bike or plodding away on a treadmill.

Because of the continuous nature of the circuit, the circulatory benefit serves the purpose of raising the athletes work capacity. For those that are unfit and needing to get in shape, these circuits can be performed frequently and will provide the necessary stress needed to improve fitness. For those that are already in shape these circuits can be used in active recovery purposes to get the athlete moving following intense competition, practice, or training.

Equipment Needed

– Medicine Ball (4-8lbs)
– Stop watch
– HR Monitor
– An open field

Intensity

The intensity of the circuits is not high, meaning that you should not be frying yourself when performing the work. A lot of times people have the habit of turning exercises into huge lactate generating workouts. This becomes problematic for two reasons. First, this sort of work takes body longer to recover from so if the goal is to perform these workouts frequently (if you are trying to raise fitness) or perform active recovery (following an intense workout) you shouldn’t expect to go all out. Second, in order to have a circulatory effect we want to work continuously for a good period of time and going all out for 2-3min wont allow you to accomplish that goal. The circuits should be “extensive” by design. Finally, if you are trying to push yourself to the limit and perform a very anaerobically focused circuit you are not in a position to optimally allow learning to take place. Many of the exercises you will choose for these types of circuits will be focused on fundamental tasks, postural tasks, or the exercises will be aimed at limitations you may have. A fatigued state is not a good state for learning to take place.

Sets, Reps, & Rest Intervals

We typically do anywhere from 3-6 sets of the circuit, depending on what else have to do that day or the length of the circuit and the reps can vary depending on the exercise or task. Some exercises are performed for repetitions while others may be performed for distance (IE, 10 yards, 20 yards, 100 yards, etc) – it really depends on the exercise, as you will see in the example below.

Rest intervals can be applied between exercises and at the end of the circuit. Between exercises the athletes are allowed to take anywhere from 0-10sec. This amount of time allows for transitioning from one activity to the next or for the athlete to get a quick sip of water before the next exercise. Remember, the intensity is low during these circuits so there shouldn’t be a need for very long rest intervals. If the athlete is in need of longer rest intervals due to excessive fatigue then you need to evaluate the intensity the exercises are being performed at or prescribe less reps or shorter distance for the given exercise because the athlete may not be fit enough to handle it. Additionally, you can use the HR monitor to evaluate how well the athlete is tolerating the circuit. Generally, we try and keep the athletes below 75% max HR during these circuits and if they begin to exceed this early in the circuit then we provide some rest between the exercises and re-evaluate the exercises we have chosen, the sequencing of those exercises, and the amount (reps or distance) that has been prescribed to the exercises.

Rest between the sets of the circuit can be longer and can range anywhere from 2-4min depending on the fitness of the athlete or how you are progressing the circuit over subsequent weeks. The HR monitor can come in handy here as you can alternatively program rest intervals based on HR recovery (Ex., recover down to 120bpm and then perform your next circuit). The HR achieved during the circuit, time interval of HR recovery and the length of time it takes to perform the circuit (this is where the stopwatch is used) can come in handy in helping you understand how the athlete is adapting and if they are getting more fit. Faster times through the circuit with lower HRs being achieved during the circuit and quicker HR recovery are all good signs.

Example

Below is an example of what a Field Circuit may look like:

– Straight Leg Lowering x5ea
– Plank x20sec
– 100yrd easy stride out x22-25sec
– 10 push ups
– 30yrds forward skip
– 30yrds backward skip
– MB chest pass, jog after it, pick it up, and repeat x3 throws
– Straight Leg Lowering x5ea
– Bear Crawl Forward x5yrds
– Bear Crawl Backward x5yrds
– Ankle Rocks x10ea
– Squat + MB Overhead Press x10
– 200yrd easy stride out x40-45sec
– Walking Lunge x8ea leg
– Side Plank x15sec ea
– 1-leg RDL w/MB Anterior Reach x4ea leg
– Pogo Hops x15yrds
– Lateral crawling x5yrds left/5yrds right
– Lateral skipping x5yrds leg/15yrds right
– MB Scoop Throw, jog after it, pick it up and repeat x3 scoop throws from both sides
– Push up x10

Rest = 2-4min between sets
Sets = 3-5

I have written in my blog and lectured about various aspects of overtraining, overreaching, and monitoring athletes over the past 4 years now (like THIS article from February 2010). One statement that I often hear from people, “Overtraining doesn’t really exist. Most people are just a little overreached if anything but people don’t ever really get to a true overtrained state.”

This is a silly statement, of course, as people can absolutely get to a true state of overtraining where serious damage to their bodies take place. Also, many of the individuals who make this statement don’t even monitor anything with the athlete, so I am not sure how they are qualifying whether the athlete is overreached or not anyway.

Recently, I received an email from an athlete who would be considered “overtrained,” and I thought I would share the brief exchange I had with them to give people an idea of what overtraining may look like. Sadly, this is not the first email I have received like this (and it probably wont be the last). I have received several emails or phone calls over the years from people telling me their story and really trying to figure out where to go or what to do in order to get their health back in order. Obviously when you get to a state like this there is the need for medical intervention. Finding a quality sports medicine doctor who understands training (and overtraining) is key.

Overtrained Athlete:

I read your article on overtraining which is no doubt what I have had for many years actually. Due to the fact my performance has went down and hasn’t come up for three years.

My question to you is what is a person to do if they are over trained? In terms of recovery? And goals of competition again in the year to follow? I should note that I have had kidney pain and infection of the kidney for over a year now and it doesn’t seem to go away. And constant weight gain even with a high level in terms of time and intensity? But not do to over eating.

Thank you and have a nice day

Regards,
Overtrained Athlete

My Reply:

Have you gone to the doctor? This seems like you have really gone past the point of no return here and will need medical intervention.

Overtrained Athlete:

Yes I have and he doesn’t seem to be concerned. I just keep getting antibiotics for kidney infection. But I think its because of chronic dehydration due to waking up from frequent urination and excessive thirst with no explanation. And doctor can’t explain it.. I wonder if its because of adrenal fatigue?

My Question to the Athlete:

How did you get yourself to this point? What sort of training were you doing?

The Athlete’s Answer:

Well I guess a few years ago (4) years. I had a coach that pushed me really hard for a year and the goal was to be strong and lean so we did a lot of strength training in the gym and long LSD rides and I did get strong and lean. And I was winning races but then I went elite or to you..cat1/2. The following year and in the same time as I was preparing I noticed my weight started going up and every time I trained my legs would be so swollen I couldn’t put my pants on. And my performance was really going down. And so my coaches approach was to increase intensity to develop power so I trained for three years doing 12 hrs a week with a group ride with strong men on Saturdays and Sunday three hour ride and two more days doing one hour hard intervals on trainer and then other days doing endurance stuff for hour and half. I would say I can’t do this I’m too tired and I got told its just mental.. You can do it.  I said maybe I’m not eating  enough because I’m up all night.. And I got told no don’t eat anymore then your husband or kids would because I will get fat. But I was clearly working harder then they were. And I just got fatter and more sore. Now I don’t know what to do because  I’m heavier then ever and even a 45 minute jog and I can’t get pants on because my legs get so swollen. The last few days I’m feeling more tired and sore then ever like having flu or after surgery feeling. Surely the pros don’t have this problem? But I can’t really say when the last time I actually didn’t follow a program. Or have ever had More then a week off.

So….Does Overtraining Really Exist?

This was a terribly extreme case. The individual has been taking antibiotics for a kidney infection that has lasted over a year!! I also wonder what it looked like when their legs were so swollen that they couldn’t pull their pants up! Cases like this are crazy and obviously, the last email above where they described the type of training that got them to this point was upsetting. I can’t believe that, with those sorts of symptoms, the coach would suggest that the athlete is “not tired” and that “it’s just mental”.

While a lot of times athletes may be “overreached” it is important to remember that the line between an overreached state and an overtrained state is a blurry one. Additionally, given the difficulty of diagnosing overtraining syndrome it makes it incredibly challenging to know where your athlete is without monitoring or having a process of evaluating whether training is getting what you want or pushing you further down into the dumps.

The only true difference between overreaching and overtraining is the time it takes for the athlete to recover back to baseline levels. Commonly there is a drop in performance output and when the individual is in an overreached state it may take a week to ten days to recover while an overtrained state may take significantly longer and, as with the case above, it could be over a years time in order to recover – provided that the athlete can find the right medical professional to help them get back on track.

The fact that training breaks us down a little bit should not be of concern. Whenever we train we get two things:

• Fitness – We get more fit. We get stronger. We improve our endurance, etc.
• Fatigue – We break down a little bit. We accrue some fatigue and our body needs to attempt to rally the troops a little bit and help us adapt to the training stimulus we just applied.

As I like to say when it comes to explaining what happens during any training session, “There is always a cost of doing business.”

Sometimes we can train very hard for a week or two and accrue a lot of fatigue and then, when we allow the athlete to recover that fatigue dissipates and there is a rise in performance as the fitness gains, previously being masked by the fatigue that has accumulated from training, now begin to manifest themselves. In this case, a little bit of overreaching provided us with a fitness gain. This sort of training is only possible when we monitor the athlete in order understand how they are adapting (or not adapting) to the training program and when we may be pushing too hard and when we may need to back off (as well as allowing us to also know when we can push harder).

A number of physiological mechanisms seem to be related to overtraining:

• Autonomic nervous system changes
• Glycogen depletion
• Decline in immune function
• Hormonal adaptations (Ex., decreased cortisol response, decreased testosterone : cortisol ratio, etc)
• Increased systemic inflammation
• Changes in cardiovascular response to exercise (Ex., decreases in Max HR and VO2max)
• Changes in mood
• Decreases in performance
• Loss of concetration
• Disturbances in sleep

The number of factors related to overtraining make monitoring the athlete incredibly complex as there are a number of things to consider, hence the reason the diagnosis of overtraining is so difficult. Often the diagnosis can be made only when the athlete has gone off the deep end and their health is in a lot of trouble. To top it off, there are a few different ways of looking at overtraining. Mel Siff, in Supertraining, discussed Local and General Overtraining and other researchers have discussed Basedow and Addison Like Overtraining.

• Local Overtraining – Overtraining specific to a body part or region of the body. This type of overtraining is commonly associated with local tissue or joint pathology due to excessive stress or strain from practice, competition, or training.
• General Overtraining – Overtraining that is more systemic and has an impact on the body overall. While local overtraining may be thought of as being “musculoskeletal”, general overtraining can be thought of as being more physiological. General overtraining can be broken down into Basedow and Addison Like, as I mentioned above.
• Basedow Overtraining – Often referred to as “sympathetic” overtraining for the branch of the autonomic nervous system that tends to predominate when in this state. This type of overtraining is thought to occur due to an imbalance between training and recovery with the addition of high levels of psycho-emotional stress or other non-specific stressors. The way I think about this type of overtraining is that the body is constantly trying to fight in your favor and try and adapt. It is always “on” and “rallying the troops” to adapt to the stress that you are placing on it.
• Addison Like Overtraining – Often referred to as “parasympathetic” overtraining for the branch of the autonomic nervous system that tends to predominate when in this state. This type of overtraining also has to do with an imbalance between training and recovery, however, this type of overtraining is accompanied by a bit of adrenal insufficiency and hormonal alterations. I tend to think of this type of overtraining as your body basically protecting you from yourself. If, in Basedow Overtraining, the body is trying to “rally the troops” and is always “on”, in Addison Like Overtraining the body is basically saying, “I’ve had enough. You need to take a break otherwise you are going to hurt yourself. I am going to make you so tired that you wont want to train. I am going to make you so sore that you wont want to train. I am going to decrease your immune system so that you get sick and are forced to take a break.”

There is a lot to think about when it comes to overtraining. No one has the solution and everyone is still looking for the best methods of evaluation to understand where their athletes are between the lines of fitness and fatigue. In understanding the various physiological factors and types of overtraining we can begin to try and formulate ideas regarding what to monitor and how to evaluate training. Too many people just write training programs, fly blind, and hope for the best. Additionally, a lot of coaches in the profession are only or primarily concerned with the “movement” component of training and they do a great job of evaluating and training it. This sort of focus may go a long way when considering local overtraining but may fall short of truly understanding the athlete without a hollistic, physiological perspective. While the programs may be sound from a movement perspective and they may have good exercise selection and balanced joint movements, this is only one aspect of training that needs to be considered. Understanding physiologically how the athlete is adapting is just as important and will provide the coach with a greater appreciation of overreaching and overtraining.

Hopefully more coaches will begin to look at the various physiological aspects of overtraining and start to create methods of evaluating their athletes to better understand how they are tolerating the stresses we apply to them.

A strength & conditioning coach needs to be a great juggler as there are many things that they need to be aware of when considering the training they prescribe to their athletes:

• Physiology
• Biomechanics
• Nutrition
• Psychology
• etc…

What it all comes down to is that, as coaches, we apply stress to the athlete and ask their bodies to adapt to that stress. Being able to juggle all the things that influence how an athlete will adapt to training stress is no easy task and it is important to remember that no two athletes adapt the same way to the same program.

One of the most difficult things to do is to train large groups of athletes while simultaneously trying to be aware of all of these potential influences with regard to each individual athlete’s adaptation to the program. However, as my friend Mark McLaughlin likes to say, “Learn to train one athlete first and then you will understand how to train multiple athletes.”

Not only do I agree with this statement but I think it is an excellent experience that all coaches should have. Oftentimes coaches get right into working with teams and dealing with the logistics of handling large groups of athletes (as well as adopting the approach of the individual that they perform their internship or graduate assistance program under) without ever having the opportunity of working with one single athlete and trying to fully understand all the potential ramifications of their training program – train in “fantasy land” so to speak. Without that experience these coaches often have a hard time seeing the big picture when it comes to trying to apply more than a stock strength and fitness/conditioning program. If the coach does get the experience to actually train just one athlete they often have a hard time breaking away from the type of general program that they would apply to a larger group of athletes, even though the logistics of the two situations are totally different and the single athlete situation would afford you greater freedom and flexibility within the program.

Of course, there are great coaches, who I have the pleasure of also calling friends and learning a lot from over the years, who work with large teams and, because they have learned to train one athlete first, are very aware of the individual response to training. Guys like Nate Brookreson, Jeff Fish, Keith D’Amelio, David Tenney, and Charlie Weingroff all understand this concept and have done a great job applying it. Of course, when in the team environment nothing is ever 100% perfect and there are logistics that may handcuff you in certain situations compared to training one athlete; however, because these guys understand the individual response to training, even though there may be logistical concerns at times, they are able to be aware of things with their team of athletes that other coaches are not and, when necessary, create systems to address any individual concerns.

I have had the opportunity of being on both sides of the fence – single athletes, small groups of athletes, and then larger groups of athletes (high school or junior high teams) and having the understanding of how to train one athlete first has been incredibly helpful. This past weekend I had the pleasure of meeting a young coach, Neil Baroody. Neil is about to graduate from college and is looking to do some work as a fitness coach for a club soccer team in the New England area, however, this past summer he had the opportunity to work with just one single athlete and it sounds like he had a great experience. He got to do a lot of different types of testing and evaluation, he got to be highly specific with his training prescription and recovery modalities, and he got to coordinate a sound training approach that may not have been possible with a big group of athletes. The summer experience is something that will serve Neil well going forward in the profession, when working with the club soccer team, because he will now be aware of the individual response each athlete has to training because he “learned to train one athlete first.”