Ian King

Does exercise accuracy matter?

/by

Introduction

When speaking to physical trainers, therapists and other aligned professionals as I travel on the quest to answer the question ‘What is the best way to train?’, I appreciate learning from them. What they think, what they say, and what they do with athletes and clients.

This journey has involved the privilege of travelling the world for many decades seeing these training trends firsthand.  When asked what the most common exercise I see being done from my innovation, it is, without question, the single-leg stiff-legged deadlift.  The only problem is that I almost never see it being done in the way I intended. It would be difficult to walk into any gym in the world now and not see someone performing an imitation of a small oil rig.

Over time I also hear the words used to describe the exercise and the interpretation of when and how to use it varies more and more.

For example, I was recently in a seminar when one of the participants  – a highly qualified and experienced practitioner, albeit a post-2000 entrant to their profession – repetitively referred to my exercise innovation of some forty years ago as a ‘single leg RDL’. And spoke about their application of it to rehab a client’s chronic hamstring injury. With limited success.

It may have been that little bit of German heritage in myself, but my excellence-at-risk meter tends to rise towards the red line when I see and hear these things that for me are the opposite of exercise accuracy. But perhaps that is my problem. Perhaps exercise accuracy doesn’t matter?

When I speak about exercise accuracy, I refer to the origin, name, execution, the application.  I will continue on with the theme of the exercise I called the single leg stiff leg deadlift.

The origin

In this section, I share my observations of the evolution of the stiff-legged deadlift.

The stiff-legged deadlift

First, there was the stiff-legged deadlift.  It was an exercise done for the most part by competitive lifter – Olympic and power – as a supplementary exercise to pulls and deadlifts.

I described this exercise many years ago in the following way:

MG Stiff Legged Deadlift:  Take a medium grip (about shoulder width) and commence in a standing position.  Lower the bar down by bending at the hips, not at the knees.  In the start, the knees should be slightly bent and remain exactly at joint angle during the lift. [1]

It was a two-legged (bi-lateral) loaded exercise using the barbell.

You will find this exercise championed in books that shaped training through the lat half a century including but not limited to:

The single-leg stiff-leg deadlift

During the early 1980s, I concluded that the dominant approach to strength training was creating muscle imbalances because of the bias in programs towards exercises such as the bench press and the squat.  I didn’t want that collateral damage for the athletes I trained, and I set about developing a categorization of exercises to avoid such imbalance in program design. This led to the concept of ‘Lines of Movement’, where I introduced terms and definitions to place every strength exercise into an exercise category.

 The following shows a breakdown of the body into major muscle groups/lines of movement, and then into examples of exercises. It is what I call ‘the family trees of exercise’. Use this to assess balance in your exercise selection.  

To help you understand how to divide and balance out your training, Ian came up with a list of major muscle groups that reflects their function:[3]

Horizontal pulling (row)
Horizontal pushing (bench press)
Vertical pulling (chin-up)
Vertical pushing (shoulder press)
Hip dominant (deadlifts)
Quad dominant (squats)

So, when I was writing a program, I increased the balance of the program by ensuring balance in the Lines of Movement.

When developing the term ‘hip dominance’ and defining what constitutes a hip dominant exercise, I realized that there were too few exercises in this category and that I needed to match the number, joint involvement and loading potential of exercises in the ‘Quad Dominant’ category.

I leaned on the traditional double leg barbell stiff-legged deadlift to create a single-leg, nil, or low-loaded variation option.

During the 1980s I refined the movement however, as with all my innovations, I trialled and tested it for a decade before extensively publishing it commencing from the late 1990s.

You can see the original exercise in the image below, taken from the How to Teach Strength Training Exercies Video Series (2000).

The ‘Romanian Deadlift’ (RDL)

The “Romanian Deadlift’ appeared in the US in the early 1990s. Initially, this exercise had no known name, or at least not one that the person I learnt it from gave it.  Dragomir Cioroslan, (a former Romanian national weightlifting coach who went on to work with the US Weightlifting team) and his protegee’s were doing a series of demonstrations and seminars during the early 1990s when many, including myself, were intrigued by a unique exercise that they were using as a supplementary exercise – somewhat of a cross between a deadlift and a stiff-legged deadlift.

I had been analyzing the physiques of Dragomir’s athletes for a few days before I got to see them train, and I was puzzled by their hamstring development. There were other shape differences between the and other weightlifters of that era, but that was the one that I linked to this exercise. So, before I got to see them lift, they had my attention.

I began integrating the ‘Romanian Deadlift’ into my training programs and in the absence of a name I called it the Romanian Deadlift, in respect of the origin. I have since noted others came to this same name conclusion. In all publications since that time, I have continued to use that name for this exercise.

The name

By the time I learnt of the loaded bilateral single-joint exercise we called the Romanian Deadlift, I was already well advanced in using the exercise variation I had developed and named the single-leg stiff-legged deadlift.

I began integrating the ‘Romanian Deadlift’ into my training straight away, however, it was not as a substitute or synonym for what I had developed but rather as an additional tool in the toolbox. In my mind they were two different exercises.

Not only was one unilateral and the other bilateral, but also because they were conducted with strikingly different techniques and loading potential.

When I see or hear the term ‘RDL’ to refer to the single-legged deadlift as I had innovated, I question their understanding of that person as to the execution and intent of each exercise.

For me, the only thing they have in common is that they are both relatively isolated posterior chain exercises i.e., they only involve the hip, rather than the knee and the hip.

The execution

To commence the discussion of the difference in execution between the single leg stiff legged deadlift and the Romanian Deadlift, I share the descriptions of each I provided in the late 1990s.

Romanian Deadlift

In plainer terms this is a flat back version of the stiff-legged deadlift.  With the bar on your back, take a shoulder-width stance and slightly bend the knees.  The knee angle is now not to change during the lift.  Flex or lower forward from the waist, keeping your chest up and hip/spine flat i.e. aligned.  Only flex forward as far as you can PRIOR to any rounding of the spine or posterior rotation of the hip.  For most, this will not be very far!

You can also accentuate the hamstring involvement by pushing the bum back and allowing your weight to drift to your heels during the lowering.     During the lift, squeeze the gluts.  This increases the hamstring involvement, which is the aim.[4]

Single Leg standing Stiff Legged Deadlift

Let the fun begin!  Stand on one leg – have the other foot off the ground, but kept roughly parallel with the leg doing the supporting.  Bend the knee slightly, but that knee angle should not change during the exercise (get a partner to watch for this, as it will be tempting to do so!).  Now bend at the waist, allowing the back to round and reach slowly towards the floor.  If your range allows, touch the floor with the fingertips and return to the starting position.  Use a speed of 3 seconds down, 1 sec pause at the ends, and 3 seconds up.

You may struggle with balance, but persist – you will be developing the muscles in the sole of the foot!  The first time you do this you may find you are touching down with the non-supporting foot regularly to avoid falling over.  This is ok, but in later workouts, try to minimize this.  When you have mastered this exercise, and touching of the ground by the non-supporting leg means terminate the set – this is your challenge.

Don’t be surprised if you can only do 5 reps on day 1!  Look to increase the reps from workout to workout.  Hold light DB’s in your hand ONLY when you get to 10 reps at the speed indicated.  No warmup set necessary.   Remember the weak side rule. [5]

Unfortunately for the world’s interpretation of how to execute the single leg stiff legged deadlift, only a few years after I began more openly sharing the exercise in publications, it appeared unreferenced in a prominent magazine, performed in a way that reflected the ‘author’s’ lack of understanding (and perhaps also the male models lack of flexibility, balance and single leg strength – to be able to do the exercise!). Learn more about that here.

To be clear, consider the following comparison:

Variables SL Stiff Legged DL Romanian Deadlift Similar Different
Hip dominant exercise

*
Isolated hamstring Less so More so (1)

*
Number of limbs One (unilateral) Two (bilateral)

*
Loading on feet Central Rear

*
Spine shape Rounded Flat

*
Chest shape Collapsed Up

*
Loading potential Lower Higher

*
  • When done correctly as per the manner originally intended.

Between the descriptions provided and the table above, it may be clearer why I do not see the words ‘RDL’ relevant to the single-leg stiff-legged deadlift. There are far more differences than similarities.

The application

The original rounded-back stiff-legged barbell deadlift is an excellent exercise for strengthening spinal segment strength in addition to hamstrings. However, the political correctness trend in exercise has veered away from exercises and variations that include a rounded spine. That’s unfortunate for athletes who experience loading and/or impact in a less-than-neutral spine shape.

The application of the exercise I innovated, the single-leg stiff-legged deadlift, is not as clear-cut as many assume. In theory, being a unilateral, single-joint exercise, it would have a broad application earlier in the training career, year and return from injury/surgery.

However due to the range involved, the increased loading on the hamstring due to the more bloated nature of the exercise, the increased demand on balance, and the fixed load of the body, this exercise needs to be reviewed and reflected on prior to being included in a training program.

Additional points to consider include:

  • When conducted in an optimal manner (as per it was developed) – with the non-working leg remaining still and parallel to the working leg – the range may be limited by the hamstring flexibility (this was not a problem for me during the developmental decade, because of the premium I placed on flexibility training).
  • If the athlete/client lacks the balance and or range to execute the movement tin the intended manner, you can choose between developing these qualities or default to the influence of allowing the back leg to raise.
  • If you go with the softer option, you are reducing the work (including balance) in general due to counterbalancing of the back leg, and reducing the workload and isolation on the hamstring by allowing the pelvis hemispheres to diverge.
  • Therefore, a decision needs to be made regarding progression – to work on improving range, repetitions, and or load. Generally speaking, I recommend working from the former to the latter.

The Romanian Deadlift (RDL) provides greater loading potential than the single leg stiff legged deadlift version, however, the following are important points:

  • The RDL should not be considered as an equal and opposite of a squat, as the relative loading potential of this exercise compared to the squat is less.
  • The RDL as a rounded back exercise should not negate the inclusion of a rounded back variation in athletes who may be exposed to loads in their sport where the spine is less than in neutral (rounded).
  • If the pivot at the hip joint is not maintained as the exclusive pivot point, the relative load/work/isolation on the hamstrings is reduced.
  • Therefore, considering the progressively reducing nature of athlete flexibility, you may not be working through the range you initially expected or anticipated.

Now to touch briefly on a key point in the application. There has been a long-retained belief, at first in the physical therapy disciplines and now also in the physical training disciplines, that isolated hamstring strength training is the key to rehabilitating or preventing hamstring strains.

Many decades ago, I reached an alternative conclusion. It’s not the aim of this article to go deep on this subject, however, I feel it may be remiss of me to not touch upon it.

Keep in mind my suggestion that if you fail to identify the cause of the injury (and I suggest weak hamstrings are not the cause in the overwhelming majority of cases), then your ‘solution’ may contribute to the problem.

Learning that the single leg stiff legged deadlift – an exercise near and dear to my heart because it is essentially one of my ‘babies’ –  is being used in a ‘hamstring strengthening program’ to rehabilitate athletes with hamstring strains, or prevent hamstring strains, is difficult to hear.  I do not believe the goal will be achieved, and the athlete does not deserve to be a guinea pig for this misguided paradigm.

Conclusion

For almost twenty years now I’ve watched the single-leg stiff-legged deadlift gain global acceptance – in and out of the gym. The only problem was that it was not being done in the intended manner.  More recently I have seen this popularity expand into rehabilitation, and this becomes even more concerning.  And to hear the confusion around the name, such as the use of the term ‘RDL’ in the same exercise name, is a reflection of a lack of understanding o the nuance of the RDL to achieve the hamstring isolation.

Maybe that’s just me being too German-like, seeking precision and excellence in the process.

Maybe exercise accuracy doesn’t matter?

 

References

[1] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! 1 (book), p. 244

[2] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, P. 32

[3] Shugart, Chris, 2001, The Ian King Cheat Sheets, Part 1 – A quick and dirty look at all the cool stuff Ian King has taught us so far, Fri, Aug 24, 2001, T-mag.com

[4] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! I, p. 230-231.

[5] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! I, p. 210-211.

Ian King

Supercross, Super Injured

/by

As the 2023 Monster Energy AMX Supercross season unfolded it become increasingly apparent that it was going to be a season remembered for its shocking injury toll.  I will specifically focus on the 450cc class, to keep the article as brief as possible. The 250cc class injury list was equal in length to the 450cc class.

Here’s he injured list as of 2 May 2023. These riders missed one or more rounds or failed to complete a round in the 2023 season due to injury sustained in racing or practice:[1]

450SX

  • Eli Tomac – Achilles
  • Colt Nichols – Unknown?
  • Jason Anderson – Neck
  • Cooper Webb – Concussion
  • Justin Barcia – Collar Bone
  • Benny Bloss – Collar Bone
  • Grant Harlan – Shoulder
  • Christian Craig – Hip, Elbow
  • Dylan Ferrandis – Concussion
  • Brandon Hartranft – Back, Shoulder, Hip, & More
  • Scott Meshey – Leg
  • Marvin Musquin – Wrist
  • Bubba Pauli – Thumb
  • Aaron Plessinger – Hip
  • Alex Ray – Finger
  • Justin Rodbell – Achilles Tendon
  • Malcolm Stewart – Knee

The author of this list acknowledged they may have missed a few injuries because the injury list was so long. They have missed at least:

  • Adam Cianciarulo – Concussion [2]
  • Kyle Chisolm – Knee [3]
  • Christian Craig – Hip and elbow [4]
  • Joey Savatgy – Wrist [5]

And in the week following the compilation of this list add the following:

  • Ken Roczen – Knee [6]

In the seventeenth and final round of the season in the 450cc class, 4 of the top 10 riders on points were not available due to injury. That’s 40% of the top 10 points leaders. And  if you add Ken Roczen  who didn’t complete the final round, that 50%.

But even that stat is misleading on the upside, as it only includes those riders healthy enough to be in the top 10 points leaders by the last round.

If we look at the riders who started the season, it’s worse. Using the 20 riders listed on the official series web site,[7]  only the following three (3) riders may have avoided missing 2023 rounds due to injury.

  • Justin Hill
  • Shane McElrath
  • Dean Wilson

Assuming the 20 riders featured were the top 20 riders for 2023, this means 85% (17 of 20) of the 2023 Monster Energy AMA Supercross top 20 lost rounds or their season due to injury.  85%. That’s a huge number, even for a high risk sport. I have not seen or made any comparisons to prior seasons; however I suggest it is a PB – for the wrong reasons.

Many were surprised and shocked, including the riders, and industry experts.

The final stretch in one of the most exciting years of the Monster Energy Supercross Championship is playing out much differently than we had expected … several contenders in the 450 Class are now sidelined with injuries. [8]

These injuries have brought out the armchair experts, submitting their theories as to the cause.

Firstly, you did not need to surprised and shocked. At least not if you had read my blog article on this very topic, warning of the impending injury impact and the reasons why.

Secondly, while everyone is entitled to their opinion, most have no ‘skin in the game’. What if their hypothesis as to the cause of the rise in injury incidence is wrong? There is no price to pay. However, someone in every racer’s team is or should be accountable for ensuring the riders enjoys an injury free career, and it’s obvious they are failing their rider.  Now this is not uncharacteristic in sport as very few athletes enjoy an injury free career for the same reason. I will share my vision for the athlete in this regard.

Thirdly I share another principle I have developed – injuries are predictable and preventable. But only if you can accurately predict them. If an athlete I injured, either they have ignored their advisors warning or their advisor failed them.

And fourthly and finally, what are some key steps a racer can take to avoid the arrival on the injury curse’ in their sport.

I told you so

I was going to name this article this ‘I told you so’. But I felt the perception that I am a smart-arse might leave the messenger targeted and obscure the message. The message is that the rise in injuries in the sport of moto/super ross was and Is predictable, and unless changes are made it will continue as the new norm. It has in most sports for their systemic failure to understand the cause of injuries, and there is nothing about off-road motorbike racing that leads me to believe they will rise above other sports in the similar situation.

Anyway, coming back to my prediction. On 8 Sep 2021 I wrote blog article titled A Lament for the Late Arrivals, where I spoke specifically about the relatively recent embracement of sports including moto/super-cross and the tipping point that has been passed in the relatively recent embracement of messed up popular dryland training methods. The lament was for the price they would pay – specially injuries and performance decrement.

I wrote:

I feel for the late arrivals, and I lament the collateral damage they are potentially walking into…. The outcome is increased injuries and decreased performance. The exact opposite to the proclaimed benefits of ‘strength and conditioning’.. Ideally, I should be saving I hope your non-specific (physical preparation) training helps you thrive. That would be nice. However, based on my experience and observations – what I know – if you do what the rest of your colleagues are doing in their interpretation of the best way to train, survive may be a more appropriate term.

The Monster Energy AMA Supercross class of 2023 walked into this collateral damage in this season.

I have a saying –

‘I take no delight in being right about my injury predictions.

I did tell you it was coming, but I don’t take any satisfaction from it. I said from the outset:

I feel for the late arrivals, and I lament the collateral damage they are potentially walking into….

Every athlete should be given the opportunity to fulfill their sporting potential, free from injury

I have been publishing this vision statement for many years now:

My vision is that every athlete should be given the opportunity to fulfill their sporting potential, free from injury.

For two reasons – firstly, performance and career results are inversely related to injury incidence and severity. The less injuries and or the less severe the injury, the higher the performance and career achievements.

I learnt this lesson unequivocally by the early 1990s and used this ‘zero-tolerance to injury’ approach to produce championship and podium outcomes in team and invidual sports.

The second reason I formed this vision was that it’s the right thing to do. Unlike the majority of coaches, I believe we can dominate in sport and provide optimal long-term health outcomes for the athlete concurrently. They are not mutually exclusive.

Other than the occasional regurgitation of my vision claimed by the usual authors unable to create original content, I don’t see many embrace my vision in the coaching decisions.

Which I why I expressed the following in my blog article titled A Lament for the Late Arrivals:

You deserve better. Our profession has failed to deliver safe training, let alone optimal training. Now it’s up to you to be more discerning. Don’t assume. Don’t imitate. Seek answers, dig deeper, objectively question and interpret the cause-effect relationship of what you are seeing and doing. Be more scientific in your review than our profession is.

Your future depends on it.

And not just your sporting future.

Injuries are predictable and preventable.

It appears that everyone has an opinion as to the cause of this injury rise in moto/super cross. And they are entitled to their opinion. What if their hypothesis as to the cause of the rise in injury incidence is wrong? You can’t prevent an injury if your hypothesis as to the cause is off track.

The most common ‘fail’ in injury explanation include:

  • It was a freak accident.
  • It’s just part of the sport.

This is a complete abdication of responsibility and ability to take control and prevent injuries.

Which is why I was shattered when I listened to and re-read Eli Tomac’s explanation for his season ending and championship denying Achilles tendon rupture in the 2023 season:

Basically at a loss for words right now over what happened and how it happened,” he said. “In my mind, it was just a freak deal and a racing situation, you know. I look back, I barely over jumped that tabletop and was just standing up into that ramp and I guess the high g load took a little too much for my Achilles there? I don’t know. I honestly just put it as a freak deal. I’ve over jumped into plenty of other jumps just as hard, if not harder, and have been totally fine before. I guess this stuff happens with racing.”[9]

You might notice some key words that I referred to above, including:

  • It was just a freak deal… I honestly just put it as a freak deal.
  • …a racing situation… I guess this stuff happens with racing.
  • … I don’t know.

I am not surprised he didn’t know what was going on with his Achilles before it tore off the bone. It would have taken a highly competent member in his support team to have provided this information. However, to not understand it better in retrospect – leaves a lesson not taken, and the probability of repeat injury.

He is a great athlete and dominating his class. This is the beauty of human performance. Even the best can be better. And one avenue available to Eli to advance would be to adopt a value-set towards injury more aligned with the philosophy described as the Serenity Prayer:[10]

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.[11]

I formed this saying many years ago –

Injuries are predictable and preventable.

However, if a coach lacks the ability to accurately and consistently predict an injury in advance – yes, in advance – then they have no chance of contributing to preventing them.

Let’s use Eli Tomac’s 2023 Achilles tendon rupture as an example.

It’s incredibly unlikely that there were no signs or messages that Eli’s Achilles was in trouble, and about to snap. Appropriate injury prevention screening would have picked this up.

If an athlete is injured, either the athlete has ignored their advisors warning – and that’s rare because why would they hire them only to ignore them? – or their advisor failed them.

Some key steps a racer can take to avoid the arrival on ‘the injury curse’ in their sport

It’s not good enough to be critical without providing at some solutions, so this section touches upon a few key, simple recommendations in the area of dryland training that will contribute to avoiding the collateral damage of mainstream training.

But before we go there let me clarity – my reference to ‘the injury curse’ was facetious. It’s the default go-to used by sports and coaches that want to abdicate their injuries to a source other than one within their control.

I have not seen it used in moto/super cross yet, but that’s only a matter of time…

Here are three simple considerations for racers to avoid injury, including crashed caused by training induced physical imbalances.

 

  1. Tissue length and tension.

I’ve been championing stretching and tissue manipulation for injury prevention, rehab and optical performance for decades. Then along came the abolition of stretching. I liken the attempts to scare individuals to avoid stretching to the many periods in history when reading or specific books were banned.  I suggest stretching has been pillared for the same reasons – because those who drive this paradigm stand to lose out (commercially) in the event you discover the benefits of stretching. Don’t became a victim to this. Stretch. Including static stretching.

As for tissue manipulation, the popularization of foam rollers is by the same interest attempting to ban stretching. Despite the economic gain for others of selling you a foam roller, the roller is innate. It can’t interpret your tension and adapt its work to address this. Whilst I do not suggest throwing out (or burring) your form roller, keep in mind it is just one of many modalities available to you to lower and monitor your tension levels. I suggest including some input from a competent human being e.g massage therapist or similar health professional with good hands and a sharp understanding of optimal tension.

Tip: If you spend more time on your bike than you do lengthening and softening your connective tissue, you will become an injury statistic.

  1. Reverse the damage of your sport before you seek to replicate it.

It shatters me to see athletes, including now off-road racers, performing ‘sport specific’ dryland training, especially strength training. A key principle I have developed and teach is that the primary goal of strength training in the first instance is to reverse any inappropriate adaptations that occur your specific sport. Let’s take the landing from jumps.. Let’s imagine that the calf and Achilles tendon increase in their tension and reduce in their length over time due to repetition of absorbing the G-forces in landing. Let[s pretend that if you don’t reverse this adaptation they become shorter, and weaker, dysfunction and inhibited, and finally experience a tear or worse a complete rupture. Actually we don’t need to ‘pretend’. That’s what happens and Tomac’s 2023 injury is a classic example of potentially failing to prioritize this ‘reversal’ work in dryland training.

Tip: Yes, you can do so-called ‘performance enhancement training’ by doing so-called sport-specific training – however if this is contributing to performance decrement because it is making the sport specific adaptations worse, you are creating performance decrement. On the other hand, if you enhance your muscle function by reducing negative sport specific adaptations through injury prevention/rehab training, you are going to enhance your performance. Sounds counter-intuitive but that’s my perspective.

  1. Challenge every adaptation.

 All training results in an adaptation. Is this adaptation truly serving you as a racer? I divide training into two simple categories – specific and non-specific. The only specific training is playing your sport, so that means when you are on the bike. All other training, no matter how much lip-service any gives that it is ‘sport specific’, it is not. It will give you specific adaptations. The only question is whether those specific adaptations will transfer to your riding.

Many athletes get a warm feeling from the muscle mass and strength increases from strength training. In part because of the social rewards placed on ‘getting buffed’, and in part because it gives them a feeling of being a warrior. There is no correlation between muscle mass and or non-specific (gym) strength that trumps optimal technical and tactical development. More likely, you will see a decline in technique if your dryland adaptations contest skill execution e.g., if you develop leg imbalances in the gym, which most do even if they are trying not to, you will load inapproachably over jumps and increase crash frequency. Just one of many examples.

Tip: Critically analyze, and in a futures sense, the adaptations your dryland training is and will give you, and question it’s transfer. If you a getting big and strong because of low-self-esteem, read a self-help book. And remember this – most of the current crop of riders leant to ride well before adding dryland training, after which they will experience a higher frequency of crashes and related injuries (because of the imbalances ij their dryland training).

Conclusion

I did intend to keep this article brief, however as I wrote my empathy for the athlete, in this case the racer, took over, and I sought to give a bigger lifeline.  (Lucky we restricted the focus to 450cc class injuries, and only over the one season!)

I don’t take any joy in saying ‘I told you so’, but it was quite ironic that what I wrote about 2021 came to be manifested within two years.

There are ways to train that can reduce a racers crashes and subsequent injuries, however it will take a fresh look at the options. Simply following the herd will not avoid this rising phenomenon of injuries that will be blamed on anything and everything other than the actual cause.

As an athlete you are not expected to solve all the problems and challenges of a long, injury free career by yourself. However, as an individual sport athlete the onus is on you to ask the right questions, and to appoint guides who have the best answers. That is you burden. Those appointments can make or break your career.

And if injuries do occur take the lesson. Avoid writing it off as a ‘freak accident’ or ‘that’s what happens in racing’.  The injuries will occur in conjunction with a crash so don’t rush to assume the injury was caused by the crash. The injury might have caused the crash. In the same way an equipment setup can cause crashes (e.g., inappropriate sag setting or similar placing too much weight on the front tyre and front washouts occurring more frequently), inappropriate body set up (e.g., imbalances in your musculoskeletal system) can cause crashes. If you don’t fully understand what causes crashes, you may never unlock the code of body-bike relationship and miss an opportunity to ‘tune’ the body in the same way your suspension mechanic tunes your bike to avoid you crashing.

Your physical coaches KPI (Key Performance Indicator) should be a reduction in crashes and injuries ahead of an increase in non-specific performance (VO2 max or load displaced in the gym or the size and strength of your muscles).

In my five decades of helping athletes fulfill their potential in a wide range of sports and in diverse countries through a double-digit number of Olympic cycles. I have seen that despite the challenges faced by athlete due to adopting misguided but dominant paradigm-based training programs, many athletes seem to want to cling onto the ego attachments of their choices. Others want to conform.

My hope is that you can do what the truly best I the world athletes do. Feel no desire to be like everyone else and find a way to train in a way that is best for you. This will need you to be willing to be different, and to make your own mind up. This alone will reduce your numbers of competitors. That’s the way of top performance. There are a few at the top so far ahead of the rest. There is a reason they are there, and you need to scratch below the perceptions to understand what sets them apart. Look beyond your sport for the best clues.

 

References

[1] https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/moto-related/current-2023-injury-list

[2] https://motorsports.nbcsports.com/2023/04/26/adam-cianciarulo-aaron-plessinger-detail-injuries/

[3] https://www.fullnoise.com.au/fullnoise-news/the-emergency-department-2023-ama-supercross-championship-round-7-arlington/

[4] https://motorsports.nbcsports.com/2023/04/10/christian-craig-timetable-for-return-uncertain-after-glendal-injuries/

[5] https://www.vurbmoto.com/joey-savatgy-injury-update-2/

[6] https://mxvice.com/injury-update-ken-roczen-10/

[7] https://www.supercrosslive.com/riders/450

[8] https://www.swapmotolive.com/2023-supercross-late-season-injury-updates-championship-changes/features/kickstart/

[9] https://www.vurbmoto.com/eli-tomac-on-future-after-achilles-injury-in-denver/

[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer#:~:text=It%20is%20commonly%20quoted%20as,wisdom%20to%20know%20the%20difference.

[11] https://uscatholic.org/news_item/commentary-how-i-discovered-i-was-wrong-about-the-origin-of-the-serenity-prayer/

Ian King

The western world’s blind spot to global physical preparation publications

/by

From their commencement in 1978 the American National Strength Coaches Association (NSCA, later changed to National Strength & Conditioning Association) produced very helpful and welcome articles on physical training (mainly strength training). However, one thing stood out at least during the period up to 2000 – referencing of non-US writers was sparse to say the least.

I asked around in the US as to why and the best explanation I could get as to why was that they felt that the non-US research could not be ‘verified’.

I don’t believe it was that simple, however that’s a discussion for another day. Let’s just say there were many nations that have been ahead of America during the modern history of our profession in the area of studying and quantifying physical preparation. And when the US stepped up its game the focus was narrow i.e. strength-centric. And I believe this disregard for non-US training publications created  a blind spot for in this profession.

A recent article highlighted this phenomenon.[1] The polite and helpful comments by a reader shed light on this. Full credit to the article author contribution, however it did reflect what I believe is the western world’s professional blind spot. And provides us all with an opportunity to make amends, to dig deeper and appreciate the origin and history of training theory and methodology globally.

I share this enlightening exchange below:

Reader Interactions – Comments

Anders Lindsjö

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 12:06 PM

Thanks for a very good article that hopefully will help coaches to use VBT in the future

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 5:18 PM

Stepping off a low platform and immediately rebounding was in use in Germany and Poland ten years before Verkhoshansky experiments…

REPLY

Kim Goss

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 6:35 PM

Thanks for the comment. Can you give me a published, dated reference from researchers in those countries that I can research to compare their work with the classical plyometrics (i.e. shock training) from Yuri Verkhoshansky’s? I’ve never seen anyone challenge Verkhoshansky’s claim that he was the creator of classical plyometrics. Fun Fact: Dr. Siff told me the East Germans had teams of researchers translating the work of Russian sports scientists such as Professor Verkhoshansky.

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 10:32 PM

It all begins with a statement by Tadeusz Starzynski, Polish jumping coach, in his “Le Triple Saut”, Editions Vigot, 23 rue de l’ Ecole de Medecine – 75006 Paris, 1987. On page 120 of this publication Starzynski states :
“La plyometrie est connue depuis longtemps et pratiquee dans l’ entrainement des triple sauteurs polonais depuis 1952”

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 10:43 PM

Continuing my research, I found an old German manual, author Toni Nett, dating back to 1952.
The title was “Das Ubungs und Trainingsbuch der Leichtathletik”, Verlag fur Sport und Leibesubungen Harry Bartels, Berlin Charlottenburg 5, Fritschestrasse 27/28. In the section dedicated to the triple jump, the exercises using depth jumps with rebound appear

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 14, 2022 AT 10:56 PM

Already in 1962 Mr. Tadeusz Starzynski had published a manual on the triple jump, where he presented the methodologies already used for a long time in Poland (including depth jumps with rebound).
The title was Trojskok, Seria popularnych podrecznikow lekkiej atletyki, pod redakcja Jana Mulaka, Sport i Turystyka, Warszawa 1962.
This publication is in my possession and I can send you a copy.

Kim Goss

DECEMBER 15, 2022 AT 8:03 AM

This is why I played it safe and used the title “A Brief History….” “Rather than “The Brief History.” 🙂

The goal of the article was to recognize a few of those Iron Game pioneers who helped with the evolution of athletic training – I’m sure I left many other deserving individuals out.

With what you’re presenting, we could say that Verkhoshansky did extensive research on depth jumps and helped popularize this form of training in sports other than track and field. That said, your references are intriguing.

In “Supertraining,” the athletic fitness textbook Verkhoshanky co-authored with Dr. Siff, there is an extensive reference list. However, even though Verkhoshanky was a jumps coach, there are no references to the publications you listed. How could he have missed this?

This information will come in handy next time I write an article about plyometrics.

Kim

P.S. Thanks for the offer to share a copy. First, I’ll see if I can find those references through my resources first.

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 15, 2022 AT 10:39 PM

There’s more : Track Technique – The Journal of Technical Track & Field Athletics, Fred Wilt Editor, no 17, September 1964 Heinz Rieger, Training of Triple Jumpers. The article was translated and synthesized by Gerry Weichert from no 8 issue of “Der Leichtathlet” dated June 6 1963. Rieger was coach of the ASK Vorwarts Club in East Berlin ( former DDR).
Several Depth Jumps exercises are presented in this very old article.

Giorgio

DECEMBER 15, 2022 AT 11:19 PM

Track Technique – The Journal of Technical Track & Field Athletics, no. 20, June 1965
Heinz Kleinen, Winter Conditioning and Training for Triple Jumpers
Translated by Jess Jarver from no 4, January 28 1964 issue of Die Lehre der Leichtathletik, published in Berlin, West Germany
Several depth jump drills in this article.

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 15, 2022 AT 11:27 PM

In short, in Poland, West Germany and East Germany, Depth Jumps with rebound had already been known and practiced for a long time

REPLY

Kim Goss

DECEMBER 16, 2022 AT 2:09 PM

Good stuff! I’ll be sure to refer to this material in future articles I write about plyometrics when appropriate.

It also could be argued that gymnasts practiced depth jumps long before Verkhoshansky published any of his research. Again, the best compromise seems to be that Verkhoshansky popularized applying many training methods from track and field to other sports. Oh, and that he had a better publicist! 🙂

Thanks again for the references!

REPLY

Giorgio

DECEMBER 17, 2022 AT 3:58 AM

I would like to point out that the Germans, during the execution of the depth jumps, used mats, precisely because of the very strong impact on the ground, very similar if not equal to the “shock” method (and we are in 1950 – 1951).

 

References

[1] Goss, K., 2022, A Brief History of VBT: Iron Game Pioneers Who Revolutionized Athletic Training, Simplifaster,  https://simplifaster.com/articles/history-vbt-pioneers-revolutionized-training/

Ian King

Understanding Plyometrics – A guide for athletes & coaches

/by

Introduction

The popularity of the training method commonly known as ‘plyometric training’ is evident in nearly all sports, and at all levels of competition today.  We have travelled from a time during the seventies and early eighties of limited awareness and open scepticism, to a time during the late eighties and early nineties where athletes and coaches in all sports are influenced to believe that if plyometric training is not part of their training methods, they are missing out.

What is plyometrics?

The term ‘plyometric’ is commonly believed to be derived from Greek words meaning respectively “greater, longer, wider” and “to measure, to appraise, to compare” (Wilt, 1975; Duda, 1988; Zanon, 1989).  Exercises considered to be plyometric in nature include movements where a rapid eccentric (pre-stretch) contraction is followed immediately by a quick concentric contraction.  Other terms used to describe this type of exercise include jump training, depth jump training, drop jump training, stretch-shortening training, reactive training, eccentric-concentric training (Reid, 1989); “bounce” training (Lundin, 1986; 1991); and stretch-shortening drills (Steben and Steben, 1981).

However, based on my conclusions, the term ‘stretch-shortening cycle’ (SSC) is possibly the most appropriate to use in any description of ‘plyometric’ exercises.  The stretch-shortening cycle is a naturally occurring biological phenomenon where a concentric (muscle shortening) contraction is preceded immediately by an eccentric contraction.  The concentric power (force available when the muscles are shortening) is enhanced or augmented because of the prior eccentric (when the muscles are lengthening) contraction.  The aim of plyometric training is to enhance the expression of speed and/or power during a stretch-shortening cycle.   Therefore, the term stretch-shortening cycle can be used as a synonym for plyometric training – a movement consisting of an eccentric muscular action followed by a concentric muscular action.

The history of plyometric training

Plyometric training in the 1980’s was often referred to as a new, revolutionary form of training (Gambetta, 1981; Hagerman, 1986).  Whilst this form of training may have been new to many Western world countries, they had been included in the training of certain countries (e.g., the Soviet Union) since the 1960’s – over thirty years ago (Tabachnik, 1990).  In reality, athletes throughout history modeling their sport in training have been using plyometrics e.g., Arthur Lydiard in the 1950’s made use of bounding type exercises to develop a powerful stride (Hennessy, 1990).  When coaches see drills such as tuck jumps being defined as plyometric training, invariably their response is ‘We have been doing that for years!’  The inference here is that it is the formalization and organization of the training method known as plyometric training rather than the exercises themselves which may be ‘new’.

The term plyometrics first appeared in the literature of sports methodology in 1966, in a Soviet publication (Zanon, 1989).  Most of the early writings focused on depth jumps.

Possible further confusion in literature and training resulted from the misinterpretation of some of the early work on plyometric training which centered almost exclusively on the depth jump.  Depth jumping became synonymous with plyometric training, resulting in the exclusion of many other valuable plyometric training options.  Additionally, the heights used in the depth jumps as claimed in early literature were literally applied to athletes of all types and stages of development.  Resultant injuries further delayed the acceptance of plyometric training, reflected in comments such as the following by Adams (1987): “… plyometrics have the greatest injury potential of any single training method.”

How do plyometrics work?

The basis of plyometric training is to train the stretch-shortening cycle.  The rationale behind the use of the stretch-shortening cycle is that it augments the concentric phase of movement, resulting in an increase in work and power generated (Asmussen, and Bonde-Peterson, 1974a; Bosco, and Komi, 1979a; and Cavagna, et al., 1968) or enhances the efficiency (energy cost) of movement when compared with similar movements performed without the prior stretch (Cavagna  et al., 1964; Thys et al., 1972; Asmussen, and Bonde-Peterson, 1974b).

What factors influence the SSC?

The extent to which the stretch-shortening cycle influences the power output in any given movement is determined by a number of factors, including:

  • The rate of the eccentric contraction.
  • The length of the delay (coupling time).
  • The rate of the concentric contraction.
  • The external load.

The factors that appear to influence the SSC ability of the athlete include:

  • Fiber type.
  • Strength.
  • Movement background.
  • Age.
  • Gender.

What training does the stretch-shortening cycle apply to?

Traditionally the only recognition of the stretch-shortening cycle has occurred in the speed-strength classification of reactive (or elastic) strength.  Applying the broader awareness presented in this article, it is important to recognize the involvement of the stretch-shortening cycle in all strength qualities (see Fig 1).  The training implication here is once the involvement of the SSC is recognized as contributing to all qualities, many possibilities exist to manipulate this component to contribute to elevated performances.  Specifically, periodization of the stretch-shortening cycle is an important possibility.

 

Contribution of the SSC to power output

LOW                                                                                    HIGH

_____________________________________________________

Maximal strength                                                      Speed strength

Strength Qualities

Fig 1 – The relationship between the strength qualities and the contribution of the SSC to power output.

Many coaches and athletes associate plyometric training only with speed or strength training.  The potential role of the SSC in the training of endurance and other strength sub-qualities (e.g., maximal strength training and hypertrophy) is often overlooked.

How does specificity affect plyometric training?

The principle of specificity supports the application of plyometric training.  The laws of specificity may suggest that in order to be most effective, plyometric training should exhibit similar patterns of 1) motor unit recruitment; 2) temporal sequence, and 3) firing frequency to movements in the events (Bosco, 1985).

Plyometric program design decisions

The athlete and/or coach are faced with making several important decisions with respect to:

  • How much should the athlete train the maximal strength, and how much should the athlete train the stretch-shortening cycle?
  • From an annual periodization perspective, in what order to develop each; and what kind of progression should the training load follow?
  • How to include plyometric training in conjunction with energy system training, technical and tactical training?
  • From a multi-year periodization perspective, in what order to develop?

Is plyometric training for everyone?

Due to the increased awareness and popularity of plyometrics, and the fact that minimal equipment is required, it is now common to observe coaches at all levels implement frequent and sometimes extensive plyometric training with athletes at early stages of development and continue attempting to elicit long term changes in the elastic strength, often without prior attempts to elicit significant gains in maximal strength through conventional methods.

The final decisions in program design should be influenced by the athlete’s response to the training process.  Keep in mind the steps involved.  Plan, implement, assess, revise, plan etc.

Conclusion

The early awe of plyometrics may have dimmed, some questions may have been answered.  After all, history suggests that this method (in its formal sense) is some 55 years old, and in reality, as old as physical training itself.  But is it really fully understood?  Is it really being utilized or exploited to its potential?

I doubt it.  I believe that the information contained in my book Understanding Plyometrics will be of great value to those who take the time and make the effort to read it.  This book aims to place plyometrics in perspective, to guide the athlete and coach in their understanding of this training method.

Many people want the quick solutions – which exercises and how many of them.  Many authors are keen to oblige.  The result – there are tables listing or categorizing plyometric exercises as ‘beginner, intermediate or advanced’; there are tables which show how many repetitions are appropriate at these beginner, intermediate and advanced levels.  These tables are based on individuals or collections of individuals opinions.  But of greater importance is that they are generalizations.  If you are happy to train or train others along ‘generalizations’, these tables will meet your needs.

But if generalizations are not good enough, you need to know more.  You need to know how to determine whether an exercise is basic or advanced – based on the capabilities of the individual – not on how some categorize the exercise.  Take hopscotch for example – it would fall into most existing tables under the ‘beginner’ column.  But to an individual with osteoarthritis in the knee, or who recently had lower body surgery – would it be a beginner exercise?  Probably not.  Most likely it would be too advanced!  The exercise should not be classified – the exercise needs to be matched to a level of ability to determine its appropriateness.

The book Understanding Plyometrics aims to increase your understanding of plyometric training and to improve your ability to apply safely and effectively what some call plyometric exercises to your training program, or to the training program of the athletes you train.

Perhaps the most important aspect of this book about plyometric training is the presentation of plyometrics as an integral part of almost all training movements, as opposed to the presentation of plyometrics as a separate, sometimes mystical, often commercialized, training method that will do all things to all athletes at any given time.

This revised or alternative perspective of plyometric training places the role of the stretch-shortening cycle and the training benefits of stretch-shortening cycle drills in perspective – in the continuum of training.  This may vary from what developed in the western world during the 1980’s.  This early western world perception which can be described as ‘classical plyometrics’ influenced a narrow perception of what constituted the training of the stretch-shortening cycle and separated it from other types of training.

Ian King

The origin and intent of Speed of Movement (SOM) and Time Under Tension (TUT)

/by

Introduction

I began my professional journey training athletes in 1980, and in the 1980s was also personally involved in competitive strength sports.  At that time there were a number of burning questions I had about training including questions about optimal speed of movement in strength exercises

I was not satisfied conducting the speed of movement in strength training aimlessly, or worse, in a way simply to allow myself to lift more weight. I witnessed ample examples of both around me every day. I wanted more purpose, a better understanding, a pursuit of excellence to optimize training for myself and those whose training I was responsible for.

I set out on a journey of discovery. Very little information was available. So I formed my own theories and methods, and set about testing them for over a decade before discussing them publicly.

I had no desire or intention to market or expose the concept. I developed it to serve the athletes as best as I could. Nor did I anticipate the extent to which this concept would travel globally, or how its origin and intent would be misinterpreted.

The purpose of this article is to share the journey of the concepts and methods I developed and refined in the area of Speed and Movement (SOM) and Time Under Tension (TUT). In doing so I provide those historical clarity for those who value accuracy of information and history.

 

What is Speed of Movement?

So, what is Speed of Movement in strength training? I have summarized the answer to this question in my 1998 text, How to Write Strength Training Programs:

Speed of movement in strength training refers to the rate at which the external resistance or body is moved.  Another word commonly seen in North American literature is tempo.  I am not sure whether this is a typical North American word or an attempt to mimic European terminology.  Speed of movement can be measured in various ways including

  1. Angular velocity (degrees per second).
  2. Meters per second.
  • Number of seconds per contraction phase.
  1. Angular velocity: Is suited for comparison to measurements made in clinical settings e.g., the Cybex and Kingcom devices have settings that are measured in degrees per second. However I have not found this a practical method in the field.
  1. Meters per second: Is suited for comparison to movement speed e.g. running speed, which is more measurable and has greater application than the measurement unit of angular velocity for the practitioner. However it is still difficult to measure in the gym and convey to the trainee.

iii.  Number of seconds per contraction phase: I believe is the easiest and most applicable to the practical environment of strength training.  During the early 1980’s I noticed Ellington Darden (an American strength expert writing for Nautilus) write about number of seconds the eccentric and concentric contractions should take to complete on the Nautilus machines.  By the mid 1980’s I had developed a system of denoting and communicating speed of movement in strength training that involved a simple numbering system. [1]

 

What were the dominant paradigms about Speed of Movement (SOM) in strength training in the early 1980s?

My search for the answers to my questions about speed of movement led me to the teaching of a few, the only ones I could find in the early 1980s who addressed this topic. I documented these findings in earlier writings:

During the early 1980’s I noticed Ellington Darden (an American strength expert writing for Nautilus) write about number of seconds the eccentric and concentric contractions should take to complete on the Nautilus machines. [2]

I was first influenced by Arthur Jones and Ellington Darden.  They were the first I had seen to attach numbers to training programs.[3]

They advocated for a controlled speed of approximately 3 seconds lowering (eccentric) and 1-2 seconds lift (concentric). The dominant message was that the eccentric phase should take longer than the concentric phase. There was no reference to the variable of the pause, the duration between the two muscle contraction phases.

I acknowledged that Jones and Darden were predominantly coming from a bodybuilding perspective. At the same time, I noted that track and field athletes and coaches at the highest level advocated all strength movements be executed explosively and with no pause. I can remember watching a national representative throwing athlete performing barbell pullovers at the Australian Institute of Sport, very concerned that his shoulder was to about to dislocate.

There was no common ground or agreement – it was either controlled speed movements for bodybuilders or explosive movements for power athletes.

Whilst I appreciated their respective influences, I felt a number of elements missing. This left me asking the following questions:

  1. What if we applied a pause between the contraction phases?
  2. What if we used various speeds for different exercises or different training outcomes? g., could there be a time for a bodybuilder to lift explosively, or a power athlete to lift slowly?
  3. What if we varied the pause duration for different exercises or different training outcomes?

These questions may seem redundant now, however in the early 1980s they were pertinent, because no-one that I had found was addressing these three questions.

So, I created my own theories and methods about Speed of Movement.

 

What difference does the pause between the eccentric and concentric phases make in strength training adaptations?

When I began competing in strength sports the role of the pause became blatantly clear, at least to myself. I was stunned by the implications of the pause on the chest during the bench press. A competitive powerlifter is required to pause the bar on the chest until the referee signals to commence the concentric (lift) phase.  The duration of the pause was subjective. Some held the pause shorter, some longer.  The duration of the pause had significant implications on how much weight you could displace successfully and be given green lights by the judges (a successful attempt).

I had developed an awareness of the pause or isometric contraction between the eccentric and concentric contractions.  This was intuition, a gut feeling… [4]

I was also surprised that no-one in that era was considering the role of the pause in not only load displacement, but on the training effect.

In forming my position in relation to the pause, questions that I had included:

  1. What’s the difference between an exercise that commences with the eccentric contraction and a movement that commences with the concentric contraction?
  2. What is the purpose of the pause?
  3. When should I pause?
  4. How long should I pause for?
  5. What happens if I vary the pause?

1. What’s the difference between an exercise that commences with the eccentric contraction and a movement that commences with the concentric contraction?

I recognized that you could divide lifts into two categories based on the muscle contraction involved first.  For example, when conducting pushing movements such as bench press and shoulder press, one typically commences with the eccentric phase.  When conducting pulling movements such as rows and pull ups, one typically commences with the concentric phase.

2. What is the purpose of the pause?

My reflections and experimentation with the pause led me to three primary benefits of the pause including:

  1. Negating of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) contribution from the eccentric phase to augment the load potential in the concentric phase and its implication on muscle recruitment. g., the longer I held the pause on the chest in a bench press following the eccentric phase, the less weight I could lift, however there was a potential that the muscle could be working harder. This benefit is most apparent in pushing movements (movements that commence with the eccentric phase).
  2. Developing joint angle specific strength. E.g., the longer I held the pause on the chest in a row following the concentric phase, the less weight I could lift, however there was a potential that the muscle could be working harder at that joint angle, developing a joint-angle specific adaptation. This benefit is most apparent in pulling movements (movements that commence with the concentric phase).
  3. Developing technique, or joint angle specific co-ordination. When learning a new movement that involves technical cues, a slower speed of movement can assist with the learning process.  Using the pause to contribute to slowing the movement down and allowing the athlete time to refocus on the subsequent body position associated with the upcoming contraction phase is valuable for this learning. E.g., at the bottom of a squat, I teach a certain management of the pelvis position, a concept I have published since the late 1990s yet one of the few to be embraced. To optimize the learning of this pelvic control and associated torso and limb relationship management, a pause is critical.

3. When should I pause?

There are two pause opportunities in a repetition:

  1. At the end of the eccentric phase and before the concentric phase.
  2. At the end of the concentric phase and before the eccentric phase.

Pause i. impacts the role of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) in a way that Pause ii. does not.  Pause ii. has since been promoted for its potential in energy recovery. However, I believe this is a very simplistic approach and fails to consider the cost implication of holding load in a static position, even if a biomechanically conductive position. My approach was to treat the pause equal at both ends.

4.  How long should I pause for?

In relation to the duration of the pause I had simply concluded that the longer you paused, the harder it was to do the lift.  Typically, I would advocate a pause duration between 0 and 4 seconds. I did not seek to quantify the duration of the pause. Now I don’t pretend to be a scientist. I have consistently said let the sports scientists come along in the future and give greater clarity to my theories. Ironically a few years later science did just that in relation to the impact of the pause.[5]

…My intuition has since been supported by science, especially the work of Australian strength researcher Greg Wilson, whose studies included a study that showed that the elastic energy from the eccentric phase continues to contribute to or augment the concentric power up until the length of pause equals or exceeds four (4) seconds (in the bench press at least).[6]

I don’t believe it is coincidence that the researcher who a few years later gave validity to my hypothesis (at least as it relates to bench pressing) was also a competitive powerlifter!

A point I want to clarify here is that Wilson’s research at that time related only to the competitive bench press, not any other lifts. This is another area that I believe has been poorly dealt with in publications since I promoted Wilson’s research – especially with those who use the ‘open book’ method of publishing (open a book and copy some of the contents, then publish the copy as their own).

For example, one publication claimed Wilsons research showed ‘that it took a 4 second pause before we eliminated the stretch-shortening effect.  So, anything less than a four second pause still involves the use of momentum.’

No reference was made about any given exercise. Had this publication been based on original writing’, perhaps the ‘author’ may have read the original research and had a better understanding of what Wilson’s research said.

5. What happens if I vary the pause?

After recognizing and respecting the overlooked critical nature of the pause, the question was what happens when I vary the pause and when does it apply?

A number of training principles guide this decision:

  1. Specificity
  2. Variety
  3. Periodization

i Specificity: My thinking respected the dominant paradigms in the respective and opposing fields -bodybuilding and power sports. From a specificity perspective, I would use longer pausers for hypertrophy and learning, and shorter pauses for maximal load and explosive power.

2, Variety: However, there is a role in the application of the pause for what many would consider non-specific training.  This is no different than any other program design variables – one is not compelled to be ‘specific’ all the time. In fact, additional training benefits come from variety.

The following is an example of this as applied to repetition range variety.

Variation may also give unexpected adaptations from repetitions. A trainee pursuing hypertrophy, after spending considerable time training in classic hypertrophy brackets (e.g., 8-12) may experience further significant hypertrophy when changing to a higher or lower rep bracket. Whilst this appears to contradict the above table, it shows that variety alone can accelerate gains. Note this applies in both strength (neural) and size (metabolic) training. The message is clear – irrespective of the specific goal, training in too narrow a rep bracket may not be as effective as alternating or mixing with different rep brackets. The key is not which reps to use, rather how much time to spend in each different rep bracket.[7]

3. Periodization: The fundamental principles of periodization recognize the value and need for change throughout a training year (horizontal integration) and throughout a career (vertical integration). For example, an athlete may commence their training year in the General Preparatory Phase (GPP) with less specificity in the pause and move towards greater specificity in the pause duration as their Competitive Phase (CP) approaches. Also, as an athlete advances in their level of qualifications over the years, the athlete may spend less time in non-specific pauses and more time in more specific pause duration combinations.

 

What happens when you vary the Speed of Movement (SOM)?

When choosing my early speed of movement combinations, I was relying on experience and intuition.  There were no quantifiably measured training effects from specific speed of movement combinations, which is no surprise because at the time I developed the Speed of Movement concept during the mid 1980s’ there was no reference I could find in literature on this subject.

I typically used longer duration combinations for hypertrophy and learning technique, and shorter duration combinations for developing maximal strength and explosive power.

These generalizations are summarized in the following table:

The speed of movement combinations suited to various strength training methods. [8] 

Eccentric Speed/Time

(seconds)

 Pause Speed/Time

(seconds)

 Concentric Speed/Time

(seconds)

 Training Methods Most Suited to these Speed Combinations Examples of SOM Combinations
very slow and controlled long slow and controlled stability/control & general fitness; metabolic-end hypertrophy;

strength endurance

 8:0:4

6:1:3

4:2:1

3:1:3
slow controlled medium fast/attempt to be fast general fitness; metabolic-end hypertrophy;

strength endurance

  

3:2:1

 
medium controlled short fast/attempt to be fast neural-end hypertrophy; metabolic-end max. strength; strength endurance 3:1:1

2:1:1
fast controlled nil fast/attempt to be fast neural-end maximal strength;

explosive power; strength endurance

 2:0:1

1:0:1
fast nil fast/attempt to be fast explosive power;

quickness/SSC;

strength endurance

 10*

*0*

*

 

How did I choose to communicate Speed of Movement (SOM)?

My primary focus was coming up with a solution to communicate with the athletes I trained exactly what Speed of Movement (SOM) I wanted them to use. I needed a simple yet effective way to achieve this:

To communicate how fast or slow I wanted an athlete to move the load in strength training, I developed a numbering system in the 80’s. [9]

By the mid 1980’s I had developed a system of denoting and communicating speed of movement in strength training that involved a simple numbering system. [10]

I settled on a three-digit method:

There are three numbers e.g., 3:1:1. All the numbers refer to seconds.  The first number relates to the eccentric phase.  The second or middle number to the pause or isometric contraction duration between the eccentric and concentric contraction.  The third number refers to the concentric phase. 

The fact that the first number always refers to the eccentric contraction can cause some confusion in the trainee as a percentage of strength exercises commence with the concentric contraction, especially the pulling movements such as the chin ups.  However, once they become familiar with the system it works excellently.  In brief, most pushing movements commence with the eccentric contraction, and most pulling movements commence with the concentric contraction.[11]

I also responded to the criticisms of my timing system in my 1998 book How to Write Strength Training Programs: [12]

  • The first criticism regarded the confusion allegedly caused because I say the first number refers to the eccentric, even when the movement doesn’t commence with an eccentric contraction.
  • The second criticism I addressed was about how ‘hard’ it is to count reps and monitor speed of movement.

Around 2010, twenty plus years after publishing the three-digit timing system, I read ‘new’ criticism. Ironically, the person leading the criticism below is a person who chose to teach this concept in a variety of publication over an extended period of time, unreferenced of course, except for the first time they published in, in line with what seems to be an industry protocol – reference it once and you have no need to apply referencing again.

I think the use of the three digit formula is partly to blame…[13].…the idea of controlling rep speed is vital.  You have to do some kind of tempo prescription.  I think the idea of using numbers was based on an over-reaction…[14]

Now heading towards forty years since I developed this concept, the criticisms continue.

In the past, we used this numerical system regularly to communicate tempo; however, we no longer use that method because it isn’t an effective way to communicate how the rep should always be performed.[15]

Time Under Tension (TUT) was such a popular idea for a long time. Here’s why it’s actually useless and what you should consider instead…[16]

As to the specifics of how I chose to communicate the three-digit timing system, I wrote this statement in 1987:

If speed indicators are given, the first number refers to the lowering (eccentric phase) speed in seconds, the middle (second) number to the duration of the pause in seconds, and the last number (third) to the duration of the lifting (concentric phase) in seconds.  e.g. 8:0:4 = 8 second lowering time, no pause, and 4 second lifting time. [17]

And repeated it in countless publications since, such as the below example:

There are three numbers e.g. 3:1:1. All the numbers refer to seconds.  The first number relates to the eccentric phase.  The second or middle number to the pause or isometric contraction duration between the eccentric and concentric contraction.  The third number refers to the concentric phase. [18]

I also provided guidelines clarifying expectations when the number ‘1’ appeared last, or when even faster movement was expected in the program design:

Additionally, when the number one does appear as the third number, the power athlete must have it reinforced – this means to try and go fast!  This is rarely done.  And when the asterisk (*) is used – it must look fast![19]

The first time – and last time – I observed this explanation published by other authors applying appropriate credit was by Charles Poliquin in 1997, over a decade after I had developed it:

Tempo, the speed of your lift, is always expressed in three digits, a formula refined by Ian King, Australia‘s leading strength coach. The first digit is the lowering (negative) portion, the middle digit the pause (isometric) phase, the third digit the return (positive) movement. Using the Front Squat example below, 3 refers to the three seconds it should take the lifter to squat down; 2 refers to a two-second pause at the bottom; 1 refers to the one second it should take the lifter to return to the start.  X is used to denote “as fast as possible. [20]

In the 1980s and early 1990s, in both publication and in programs, I would place a colon or hyphen between the numbers. Considering I was handwriting the training programs for each athlete in the 1980s, it was an effort I will not forget! During the 1990s I morphed this into writing three numbers with no punctuation, more due to time efficiency than anything else. The variation used in unreferenced and uncredited publications indicates which decade of my publishing they are copying.

 

How and why was Time Under Tension (TUT) developed?

I coined the term ‘Time Under Tension’ (TUT) also in the 1980s.  It was not needed as a communication for athletes. However, it was relevant to coach education.

TUT is not a synonym for speed of movement. It is a term used to measure the impact of the speed of movement – i.e., how long were the muscles under tension of the load/lift.

The application of my three-digit timing system made it possible to measure the duration of reps and sets to ascertain where they sat in the TUT table. In fact, without this system, this concept – TUT – would not have been very measurable.

The time from the start to the end of a set I called the ‘time under tension’ (TUT).[21]

This term has gone on to become not only popular but an accepted commonly used term in strength training.

Here’s how I describe TUT:

Time under tension (TUT) refers to the time that the muscle is working continuously.  This is usually measured in seconds and refers mainly to the duration of tension within a set, although can be calculated as total time under tension in the workout.  Time under tension is associated with metabolic adaptations from strength training, and is believed to be highly correlated with hypertrophy training.  For example, a higher number of reps as are used in hypertrophy training, have an inherently higher time under tension (all things being equal) than a lower number of reps as typically used in neural strength training. [22]

 The following provides working guidelines for the application of the TUT concept in strength training program design:

The following table shows a guideline for the training methods and benefits associated with varying time under tension.  As is evident there is a degree of overlap between time ranges.[23]

Common interpretation of time under tension (TUT).[24]

 TUT Dominant Training Effect
1-20 seconds Speed strength/maximal strength
20-40 seconds Maximal strength/hypertrophy
40-70 seconds Hypertrophy/muscle endurance

 

Guideline for time under tension and associated training methods and adaptations. [25]

Time under tension for set (seconds) Dominant Training Effect Training Methods and Adaptations
1-20 secs

N

E

U

 Quickness / SSC

Explosive power

Neural-end maximal strength (relative strength)
20-40 secs

R

A

L

 

 Metabolic-end maximal strength (absolute strength)

Neural-end hypertrophy
40-70

M

E

T

A

 General strength/metabolic-end hypertrophy

Stability/control & general fitness
>70

B

O

L

I

C

 Stability/control & general fitness

Muscle endurance

 

TUT was never suggested to be a science per se, rather a guideline.  One day the scientists will have their say for those who seek ‘research’ approval.   Nor was TUT developed to be taught to the end user. It was a professional-level concept aimed at providing some degree of quantification and categorization of the impact of combinations of Speed of Movement on training adaptation.

I am intrigued by the embracement of TUT in academic literature. This concept is referred to in so many articles, yet the expectations of appropriate, professional referencing are not met.

 

What was the publishing timeline of SOM and TUT?

I started using my three-digit timing system in program design with athletes in the mid-1980s.  In the initial years I would verbally explain it to them to help them interpret their written programs.  Keeping in mind that the individualized training program I gave to individual between 1980 and 1989 were hand-written, therefore access to printed documents was not as easy as it has been since the advent of the Information Age in 1989.

The next phase of communication with the athlete about SOM and the three-digit timing system was a printed document, kept loose-leaf in their training diaries. This worked reasonably well with the training diaries that I began producing in 1987[26] for athlete.

In about 1988 I began integrating this printed document into their training diaries.

The first commercial artifact I made available to the broader public was the 1989 edition of the training diary, however sales were by word of mouth, not marketed.

I had no desire or intention to market or expose the concept. Unlike the ‘modern-day’ strength coach, my focus was exclusively on giving athletes in my care a performance advantage and sharing proprietary concepts with others was not fitting with that vision.

This presented a challenge when I began to receive requests to publish training programs. I was not accustomed to writing programs with SOM guidance, so I had to choose between providing what I considered a sub-standard training program for publishing by excluding SOM, or including SOM and providing excellence, at risk of exposing the performance advantage.

I chose a compromise – I submitted the programs for publishing with SOM guidelines in them but intentionally avoided any additional attention to this unique and proprietary concept. You can see examples of this, published and presented in Canada[27] [28] and the USA[29] [30] [31] [32] from the early 1990s onwards.

It was not until 1998 [33], over a decade after I began applying the concept, that I published more openly about it.  The reason this occurred included:

  1. I have a multiple decade tradition of choosing not to publish on an innovation prior to a decade of testing and refinement.
  2. I increased my focus on coach education and this coincided with that move.
  3. The concept was being ‘leaked’ by a certain individual.

Let me be very clear – there were several colleagues who were exposed to the three-digit timing system during the second half of the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s. However, in that time there was only one whose modus operandi was to identify excellent, but little know training concepts typically found outside of North America and publish them.

The approach typically used was to publish them in the first instance giving recognition to the original source but claiming to have modified, and from then on drop the referencing to the origin.  This strategy was attempted on the three-digit timing system, however perhaps unlike other original thought providers, my response resulted in a backing off from that approach, and they reverted back to more honest recognition of the source.

Tempo refers to the speed of a lift and can be expressed in a three-digit formula developed by Ian King, one of Australia’s most accomplished strength coaches.[34]

The first time I have found a publication by this individual using my three-digit timing system in program design was in 1997, over a decade after I developed the system.[35]

“It’s always expressed in three digits, a formula refined by Ian King, Australia’s leading strength coach…” [36]

Until then, the programs provided by this coach – either in public domain or in service to athletes – did not contain any digit-timing system. In fact, they did not recognize the pause between eccentric and concentric contractions at all.

However, to this coach’s credit, independent from my works as evidenced by their 1988 article, [37] they were aware of the value of varying repetition speed. However, this was in the absence of any awareness of the role of the pause between eccentric and concentric contractions, and in the absence of any digit timing system. Instead, words were used to communicate the indented speed. (See table below from this 1988 article). [38]

Providing further clarification about the intent and use of SOM and TUT

In 1998 I published content including the following with the intent of providing clarity about SOM and TUT. There had been an over-reaction to the concept, and more (slower reps, longer duration TUT) was being popularized as better:

Where I believe most get it wrong is this…the system never came with a user manual.  The number one use of this system I believe is this.  For those concerned about power, rate of force development, I do not recommend using anything less than a fast or attempted to be fast concentric contraction for some 80-90% of total training time. 

A lack of awareness of the ‘need for speed’ (attempted acceleration) in the concentric phase in the power athlete may result in an adaptation to a non-specific rate of force development.  This is the same non-effective and perhaps detrimental training effect that occurred when athletes first started using strength training and used the bodybuilding methods.  A total lack of awareness of the need for a fast/attempted to be fast concentric contraction.  Therefore, the power athlete cannot afford to spend more than 10-20 % (as a generalization) of their total strength training time using number greater than 1 as the third number.  Additionally, when the number one does appear as the third number, the power athlete must have it reinforced – this means to try and go fast!  This is rarely done.  And when the asterisk (*) is used – it must look fast!

Note that …. programs as published in most popular media are for bodybuilders.  Slower concentric times are used – and this is okay for bodybuilders…Great for hypertrophy, but non-specific to rate of force development.  Use sparingly with the power athlete.  Spend most of the time reinforcing ‘speed’!

The second most common error is for the program writer to compile a sequence of numbers which, when combined with the reps written, result in a time under tension that is not specific to their intended training outcome e.g. 421 x 10 reps (=70 sec) for maximal strength.  This is an easy error to make and simply requires first understanding training effects as they are related to total time under tension, and then analyzing the program before it is given out.

The major groups of speed combinations I use are as follows (see Table 53).  You may note that only one out of five (or 20%) of the combinations use a deliberately slow concentric phase.

Table 53 – The major groups of speed of movement combinations in strength training.

Eccentric Speed/Time Pause Speed/Time Concentric Speed/Time
Very slow and controlled Long Slow and controlled
Slow controlled Medium Fast/attempt to be fast
Medium controlled Short Fast/attempt to be fast
Fast controlled Nil Fast/attempt to be fast
Fast Nil Fast/attempt to be fast

 

The advent of the four-digit system

Following my 1998 ‘user-guide’ about the three-digit system, Charles Poliquin began publishing a four-digit system:

“…I now use a four digit system which is a refinement of a three digit system developed by my Australian colleague Ian King….” [39]

In my response to this ‘refinement of my system’ I wrote:

More recently some have added a fourth number to my three number speed description.  This fourth number describes the pause time between the end of the concentric and the start of the eccentric phase.  My initial numbering system inferred this pause to be the same as the pause between the end of the eccentric and the start of the concentric phase.  There is technical merit to the addition of this fourth number, but I am not convinced that the average athlete or even program designer understands the rationale behind differentiating between the two pauses…. [40]

Note that the four-digit approach arrived nearly 15 years after I commenced using the three-digit system.

Perhaps my expectations are too high assuming that such a time gap would have provided more clarity about the subject. Even so-called ‘industry experts’ struggle with accurate interpretation.

Poliquin preferred a three-number system, while King preferred a four-number system…[41]

 

The industry response to SOM and TUT

It is interesting to note that after the publishing of SOM in Australia, Canada and the US between 1986 and 1996, there was limited uptake of the SOM and TUT concept and method.

For example, as an insight into lay media trends of the time, a program published in Men’s Fitness in 1997, there was no reference to SOM. [42]

This is not, in my opinion, an exception, rather than the rule. Take Dietmar Schmidtbleicher’s accumulation and intensification approach to strength periodization. [43] This method was proposed by the West German strength researcher in the at least the early 1980’s and further promoted by Canadian strength coach Poliquin including in his 1988[44] NSCA article.

It was only when this concept was published in populist lay-person publications that even physical preparation coaches began aware of and adopting the concepts.  Again, I refer to the strength training program in the 1997 Issue of Men’s Fitness – not a single reference to this training method.

However, the awareness of these concepts changed after they were shared through lay publications, such the internet bodybuilding magazine t-mag (as they were known then), and books targeting the end-user such as Poliquin’s 1997 book[45]:

T: A lot of people don’t know this, but you pretty much invented tempo prescriptions, right? (Note: In case you don’t know, tempo prescriptions are those numbers like 211 you see beside most of the exercises listed in T-mag training articles.)

Ian: Definitely. That is my baby….

T: How did you come up with this idea? 

Ian: It was just one of those conclusions I’d reached from my involvement in sport. I knew there was a difference between when someone holds the bar on their chest or bounces it off. So, what I did is control the variable in the pause between the eccentric and the concentric. I created a method for communicating what speed I wanted them to use in each part of the lift. It was, of course, in the form of three digits with each digit representing a certain number of seconds.

I do need to give credit to Arthur Jones and Ellington Darden. They were probably the only people making references to the eccentric and concentric speeds. Some say Arthur only wanted to control tempo to protect his equipment, but I don’t know about that. I just put it into a user-friendly, easy to communicate form for the athlete and I respected the pause. Since then, science has validated that pause, but I created the method from intuition before science validated it. This is what I meant by not waiting on the research. [46]

The father of this numbering system, or at least the uncle, is Australian super coach Ian King. I call him the uncle of this practice because Ian doesn’t take full credit for the numbering system. Instead, he lists Arthur Jones and Ellington Darden as the first to attach numbers to training programs. However, Ian was the first to recognize the role of tempo, or speed of movement, in what’s known as the stretch shortening cycle.[47]

You may not know this, but Ian King invented modern tempo prescriptions, you know, those 311 or 302 numbers you see listed after exercises in most strength coaches’ training programs. Good thing too, since manipulating rep speed can lead to different lifting goals (hypertrophy, explosiveness, maximal strength, etc.)[48]

 

Lack of accurate attribution

It would seem perhaps only a minority seek to determine the origin of concepts.  In relation to SOM and TUT, I rarely see the appropriate attribution.   I suggest two possibilities for this – firstly, the post 2000 advent of the 4th digit to SOM. This is despite that author providing appropriate attribution:

“…I now use a four digit system which is a refinement of a three digit system developed by my Australian colleague Ian King….” [49]

Secondly, I suggest that there has been a concerted effort by certain individuals to disguise the origin of much of their published works.

For example, in 2006, an individual who has worked to position himself as an ‘industry leader’, and who has published my speed timing methods frequently in the absence of any credit, gave an account of the history of the concept, concluding with an alleged rumor that ‘some say it [speed timing system] came out of Australia’.  Yet, in the same publication, this author claimed to have ‘read nearly everything there is to read in the field of strength and conditioning’.

This trend of factually incorrect referencing continues:

The late Charles Poliquin was the first to teach us about tempo, suggesting a three-digit formula to help coaches communicate how reps should be performed by their athletes (later refined to a four-digit formula)…[50]

I expect that ethical and well-researched authors and presenters will appropriately reference and credit the origin of SOM and TUT. They were developed to serve the end-user, not to gain approval from or impress colleagues.

 

Conclusion

I set out in the early 1980s to learn what was the best way to train, both for my athlete clients and for myself.  That journey included a focus on the question of what the optimal speed of movement is. The conclusions I reached from the search led to the two concepts.  Firstly, the creation of a Speed of Movement (SOM) concept for the end user, using a three-digit system to communicate that speed.  Secondly, a Time Under Tension (TUT) concept with guidelines relative to desired training outcomes to guide program design for professionals.

At the outset there was no intention to develop a concept and methods to be marketed or used as a tool for self-promotion, as my SOM and TUT concept and methods have been used by some. Rather it was a personal journey to solve an existing challenge, with no intention of releasing in the short-term.

SOM and TUT were never intended to be ‘exact science’. I leave that to my academic colleagues to qualify the concept. There were intended as methods of communication and concepts to provide framework for training program design decisions.

The fact that some find criticism is of little interest or relevance. SOM and TUT are not created to be obligatory-use concepts, and therefore one can chose to use them or not.

If your training results or those of your clients have or are being enhanced by your application of SOM and TUT concepts, they are serving in the manner intended.

——

NB. Want to dive deeper int SOM and TUT? Check the KSI Short Course – Time Under Tension – Exploding the Myths!

 

References 

[1] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 115

[2] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, King Sports International Publishing, p. 123

[3] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! (Book), King Sports International Publishing, p. 68.

[4] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), p. 123

[5] Wilson, G.J., Elliott, B.C., and Wood, J.A., 1991, The effect on performance of imposing a delay during a stretch-shorten cycle movement, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 23(3):364-70

[6] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), King Sports International Publishing, p. 123

[7] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), King Sports International Publishing, p. 93

[8] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, King Sports International Publishing, p. 126

[9] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™, Ch 12 – What speed of movement should I use?, p. 61-67

[10] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 123

[11] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 124

[12] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 124

[13] xxxx, 2005, The Evil Scot: An interview by Chris Shugart, T-mag.com

[14] xxxx, and xxxx, 2009, Program Design Bible

[15] xxxx and xxxx, 2020, Secrets to Successful Program Design, Human Kinetics

[16] https://www.skillbasedfitness.com/its-time-to-forget-about-time-under-tension-tut/

[17] King, I., 1987 (1st Ed; 4th Ed 1990), Training Diary

[18] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 123

[19] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 123

[20] Poliqin, C., 1997,  The Poliquin Principles, Science of Tempo, p. 25

[21] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!, King Sports Publishing, Brisbane, Australia, p. 61

[22] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs, p. 129-131

[23] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs, p. 129-131

[24] King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™, p. 61-52

[25] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs, p. 129-131

[26] King, I., 1987, Athlete Training Diary, 1st Edition (subsequent editions in 1988, 1989 and 1990). (Book)

[27] King, I., and Poliquin, C., 1991, Strength training for Alpine Skiing, Level 3 coach education seminar for the Canadian Association of Coaching Whistler Canada.

[28] King, I., 1993, Plyometric Training: In Perspective (Part 3), Science Periodical on Research and Technology in Sport, 14(2), Canada. (Article)

[29] King, I., 1992, Strength training and conditioning for rugby, Presentation at the 1992 NSCA National Convention, 18-20 June 1992, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (Presentation)

[30] King, I., 1996, The 12 Week Beginning Program Combining Strength Training and Jump Training for Long Term Development – Part 1, Performance Conditioning for Volleyball, Vol. (3):4, p. 4-5. (Article)

[31] King, I., 1996, The 12 Week Intermediate Program Combining Strength Training and Jump Training for Long Term Development – Part 2, Performance Conditioning for Volleyball, Vol. (3):5, p. 4-5. (Article)

[32] King, I., 1996, The 12 Week Advanced Program Combining Strength Training and Jump Training for Long Term Development – Part 3, Performance Conditioning for Volleyball, Vol. (3):9, p. 2-3. (Article)

[33] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs: A Practical Guide, King Sports Publishing, Brisbane, Aust. (Book)

[34] Poliquin, C., 2000, Current Trends in Strength Training – A reference manual,  Tempo, p. 41

[35] Poliqin, C., 1997,  The Poliquin Principles, Science of Tempo, p. 25

[36] Poliqin, C., 1997,  The Poliquin Principles, Science of Tempo, p. 25

[37] Poliquin, 1988, Five steps to increasing the effectiveness of your strength program, NSCA, Vol 10(3):34-39.

[38] Poliquin, C., 1988, Five steps to increasing the effectiveness of your strength training program, NSCA J 10(3):34.

[39] Poliquin, C.,1999, Modern Trends in Strength Training, (draft)

[40] King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), Speed of Movement, p. 124

[41] Robertson, M., 2010, Old school tempo training for more muscle, t-nation.com, 26 April 2010.

[42] xxxx, and xxxx, 1997, Three‐phase Weight Training Program, Men’s Fitness, Dec 1997

[43] Schmidtbleicher, D., Maximalkraft und Bewegungsschnelligkeit, Limpert Verlag, Bad Homgurg, 1980.

[44] Poliquin C. Five steps to increasing the effectiveness of your strength training program. NSCA J. 1988; 10: 34‐39.

[45] Poliqin, C., 1997,  The Poliquin Principles

[46] King, I., 2000, in Shugart, C., Meet The Press – Coach of coaches: An interview with Ian King, 29 Dec 2000, t-mag.com

[47] Louma, TC and King, I., 1999, 4 Seconds to More Productive Workouts, Fri, May 21

[48] Shugart, C., 2001, The Ian King Cheat Sheets, Part 1 – T-mag.com

[49] Poliquin, C.,2000, Modern Trends in Strength Training

[50] xxxx, and xxxx, 2020, Secrets to Successful Program Design, Human Kinetics

 

 

 

 

Ian King

The athlete and boiling water – how the lessons are lost

/by

There is an old fable that a frog in water where the temperature is being slowly raised will not jump out of the water, as the changes to their detriment are slow. Compared to a frog suddenly placed in boiling that may realize this is not a healthy place to be.

It appears to me that as the injury incidence rises in sport from decade to decade athletes are like this fable. They assume it is normal and accept the environment.

In an earlier article (A Lament for the Late Arrivals) I spoke about four waves of acceptance of strength training in sport (Table 1 below).  In this article, I seek to give specific examples of the lessons that should have been learnt from any of these earlier adopter sports, lessons that could and should have been passed on to improve the lot of the subsequent generation of athletes, and the later adopting sports.

For the purposes of this discussion, I will focus on the tipping point in the adoption of non-specific training referred to as physical preparation (or in the case of the American interpretation, strength and conditioning) as it relates to one specific sport sub-category – elite female swimmers in Australia.  To highlight the impact of this tipping point, I compare two cohorts – the pre-2000 cohort (1980-2000) to the post-2000 cohort (2000-2020), with specific reference to performance threatening injuries and surgeries caused by training.

The tipping point being the term credited in the first instance to American sociologist Morton Grodzins who coined the term in the 1950s[1], as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as:

“…the critical point in a situation, process, or system beyond which a significant and often unstoppable effect or change takes place…” [2]

Therefore, I am not referring in my classification of sports and time to the outlier who was an individual early embracer of say strength training, but rather to the critical point where the rate of acceptance accelerated.

US futurist Joel Barker talks about the time it takes to reach 10 percent uptake in a new trend is the time that it races up to 90 percent acceptance, suggesting that the 10 percent mark may be a typical tipping point.[3]

Without actual statistics in each sport, my classification relies not only upon personal professional observations and is a generalization.

Table 1 – Four waves of sports that embraced physical preparation.

Phase USA Australia Sports
1 – Early embracers <1980 <1980 Track & field, American football
2 – >1980 >1990 Power and mixed energy sports e.g. rugby, Australian Rules
3 – >2000 >2000 Diverse medium sports e.g. swimming
4 – Late arrivals >2010 >2010 Displacement, balance and more coordination-based sports e.g. off-road motorcycle disciplines

©King, I., 2021

I now turn to the concept of turning point.  Vocabulary.com defines turning point as:

“…a specific, significant moment when something begins to change…” [4]

 The specific application of the turning point I introduce is when the impact of a tipping point becomes apparent in a larger scale, for better or worse.

We can measure this from the perspective of the intended goals of physical preparation – to prevent injuries (specifically to reduce injury incidence and severity and lengthen careers) and enhance performance.

Further, we can trade off the performance enhancement benefits against the injury costs.

The post-2000 cohort analysis (2000-2020)

A 2016 article identified Australian top 10 female swimmers post 2000.[5] This list included, in this order:

Libby Trickett (nee Lenton)

Petria Thomas

Leisel Jones

Cate Campbell

Emily Seebohm

Jodie Henry

Stephanie Rice

Alicia Coutts

Jessicah Schipper

Bronte Campbell

Libby Trickett (nee Lenton)

Triple Olympian Libby Trickett’s (nee Lenton) career spanned the post-2000 era – including the 2004, 2008 and 2012 Olympics (with a brief retirement in 2009).

In the early 2000s, Australian swimming and triple Olympian Libby Trickett (nee Lenton) became the first swimmer celebrated by the swimming fraternity for their strength training induced physique changes, in contrast to the response that Australian triple Olympian Lisa Curry received for the same transformation in the lead up to the 1992 Barcelona Games.

Libby suffered from wrist pain throughout her career:

“I have always had weak wrists and this problem first flared up after Beijing (the 2008 Olympics),” she said.

However, in 2011 the injury got worse. It is apparent the pain was less related to swimming than to her dryland training, at least initially.

“But this year it has started to hurt a lot more, at first when I was doing push-ups, then chin-ups, then gym and boxing, and then actually swimming. It got to the point where it was extremely uncomfortable most of the time.”[6]

She subsequently underwent surgery in 2011 to remove a cyst from the right wrist. [7]

In late 2012 she then tore her scapholunate ligament in her right wrist during a “…regular gym session.’ [8]

In December 2012 she had a second round of surgery on the right wrist:

After a full wrist reconstruction that never completely healed, it became clear that her swimming career was over. Trickett retired for the second time in 2013 at the age of 27.”[9]

This injury forced her into retirement and denied her from fulfilling her intended legacy at the 2106 Rio Games:

Despite amassing great success representing Australia in three Olympics, the freestyler had her eyes set on Rio in 2016.   

‘The pack starts to fall away, and you find yourself in a rarer and rarer crowd: the elite of the elite. And you get a rush from chasing that kind of distinction. I’m swimming for my legacy. Three Olympics is impressive, but four is legendary,’ Trickett wrote…[10]

The value placed on strength training in Lenton’s career is reflected in the reference to and sequence of strength training in this quote, where it appeared before reference to swimming:

“AFTER all the hard work, sacrifice, hours in the gym and countless laps in the pool, Libby Trickett is about to find out if she still has what it takes to be an Olympian”[11]

Petria Thomas

Triple Olympian (1996, 2000 and 2004) Petria Thomas struggled with shoulder injuries throughout her competitive career:

“Recovering and coming back from her three previous surgeries during her celebrated career…” [12]

And by the age of 43 underwent her fourth shoulder surgery, what appears to be a shoulder joint replacement or similar:

“… recovering from a four-hour shoulder replacement surgery on her right shoulder – her fourth major shoulder operation…“Thankfully (I’m) not in too much pain after my shoulder replacement surgery today, which went well,” Thomas wrote….“My shoulder was very arthritic so (I) defiantly made the right decision to get a new one!”[13]

Thomas engaged in strength training at the Australian Institute of Sport whilst still in high school. Note the importance placed on strength training based on the sequence of training modalities in the below:

“Training at the AIS was gruelling for a full time student. Thomas would rise at 5 am and train at the gym or the pool for a couple of hours before school. After school she returned for more training before going to the study hall for her schoolwork.”[14]

Leisel Jones

 The first Australian swimmer to attend four Olympics[15] (2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012), Leisel Jones appears to be an exception.

“I work on injury prevention as part of my training. Luckily I haven’t had any major injuries, just a few niggles here and there…”[16]

Cate Campbell

Four-time Olympian (2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020) Cate Campbell’s underwent shoulder surgery in September 2014[17]:

CATE Campbell is prepared to sacrifice her world title defence next year for Rio Olympic glory and has booked in for shoulder surgery next week that has ruled her out of racing for the rest of 2014. 

The world 100m freestyle champion has silently battled through the “chronic pain” of a bone spur impacting upon a nerve in her right shoulder, but with her long course season now finished with another two gold medals at the Pan Pacs on Sunday night she revealed her next task was surgery. [18]

In addition to the shoulder surgery she received cortisone injections:

“…had six or so cortisone injections into her neck..”[19]

Suffered a hernia in 2016 and underwent surgery for this:

“Campbell developed the hernia 3 months ago, but was not able to have the surgery before Rio for fear it would disrupt her training and preparation….The Sydney Morning Herald says Campbell will have surgery in October, after taking a post-Olympics holiday.”  

That was her apparently second surgery for the same type of injury:

“That will be her second such surgery in the past year.”[20]

Campbell told The Australian that the hernia, her second in 12 months, did not impact on her performances in Rio de Janeiro where she failed to win a medal in the 100m despite being the favourite.[21]

She showed some appreciation of the injury implication for life quality post racing:

“I’m 22 and I’m waking up with chronic pain in the morning, it doesn’t bode well for 50 years’ time,” she said. [22].

Emily Seebohm

Four-time Olympian (2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020) Emily Seebohm is another exception to the post 2000 pattern.  She suffered a dislocated kneecap in 2015[23] whilst riding a horse[24] however otherwise describes herself as;

“…’lucky that I’ve never had any massive injuries.”[25]

Jodie Henry

2004 Olympian Jodie Henry failed to defend her 2004 title in the subsequent Olympics’ due to a hip muscle injury:

“Australian star Jodie Henry won’t defend her 100-meter freestyle Olympic title in Beijing because of a muscle imbalance in her pelvic area. 

.. “I have been struggling with an injury which has meant that I haven’t been able to train as much as I would have liked, and as much as I have needed to, to be ready for the Olympic trials.” [26]

An emotional Henry fought back tears as she admitted matter had finally won out over mind, confirming she would miss the Olympics after succumbing to a chronic and complicated pelvic injury.

Henry, 24, will now relinquish her 100m freestyle title and be a frustrated observer as her beloved 4x100m freestyle and medley relay teams try to defend gold against strong challenges from the powerful US and German squads.[27] 

She was adamant she was not retiring:

Henry immediately ruled out retiring and said the injury would only need a few months of physio and pilates treatment to be fully healed.

…”I’m happy to say I’m definitely not retiring. There’s no way I want to go out like this. Now I’m just looking at resetting goals and fixing my injuries,” Henry said.

“It does cross your mind but I quickly put it out of my head. I’m only 24. I’ve got good swimming years ahead of me. I’m a sprinter. There’s a 40-year-old trying out for the American team and she’s a good shot. I can keep on going.“[28]

She retired the next year:

“The 25-year-old said her persistent injury gave her insight into life outside of the pool and ultimately led to her decision to retire.”[29]

Stephanie Rice

Dual Olympian (2008 and 2012) Stephanie Rice struggled with shoulder injuries throughout her competitive career:

By 2010 she had racked up an un-viable amount of cortisone injections:

She has had seven cortisone injections in the shoulder, which is three more than what doctors recommend. If she had more it could cause structural damage that could end her career. “It is really inflamed,” Rice said.”[30]

She then underwent shoulder surgery in 2010, missing the 2010 Commonwealth Games:

“If she delayed the arthroscopic surgery, the 22-year-old Queenslander risked permanent damage and derailing her hopes at the 2012 Olympics in London…

 … Rice’s injury is not just one inflamed joint in her shoulder, but three joints, making surgery inevitable.” [31]

“Just got out of surgery. Things went well, thank you God … just cleaned the bursa in my right shoulder.”[32]

She repeated surgery in 2011 on the same shoulder:

“In a bit of deja vu, Australian superstar Stephanie Rice has undergone shoulder surgery and pulled out of the remainder of the Queensland State Championships, much like what happened in 2010 at the Pan Pac Championships when her problems first came to a head. It was last year’s version of these State Championships where she made her return after the prior surgery.”[33]

And there was a third surgery on the same shoulder, date unclear:

“Rice…having undergone three shoulder operations.”[34]

The surgeries did not resolve the issue as reported during 2012:

“The triple Olympic gold medallist revealed this morning at the New South Wales swimming titles that her troublesome right shoulder has not improved from recent surgery.”[35]

“Triple Olympic gold medal winner Stephanie Rice has admitted her injured right shoulder is giving her so much concern as she continues to nurse the injury towards next month’s selection trials, that if this wasn’t an Olympic year, she would have taken 12 months out of the water.”[36]

She managed to qualify for the 2012 London Olympics.

“Rice competed in London after undergoing three shoulder surgeries between the two Olympics. She finished fourth in 200 m individual medley and a joint sixth in 400 m medley. The London Olympics was her last stop as a swimmer and she eventually announced her retirement in April 2014”[37]

However, despite more shoulder surgeries:

“Rice, who has been plagued with injury, has not raced competitively since her unsuccessful 2012 London Games campaign, having undergone three shoulder operations.”[38]

And retired in 2014[39] without having raced since 2012.

Alicia Coutts

Triple Olympian (2008, 2012 and 2016) Alicia Coutts suffered a serious shoulder injury in 2014,[40] which remained with her in the following years:

“A chronic shoulder injury that refused to go away..”[41]

She retired in 2016 following the Rio Games:

In the final individual swim of her three Olympic campaigns, fellow Australian Alicia Coutts finished out of the medals in the final of the women’s 200m individual medley, touching in fifth place before tearfully signing off. …I’m just excited I could go out on my own terms after shoulder injuries…I’m proud of my achievements.”[42]

Regarding the shoulder injury her coach, post her retirement, shared:

“Alicia tore her labrum in her shoulder but it was never fully repaired, leaving her swimming in constant pain for two years,” Fowlie said. 

“She had a choice, surgery and end her career or push through and basically swim over one million strokes of constant pain to get on that team for Rio. [43]

Jessica Schipper

Triple Olympian (2004, 2008 and 2012) Jessica Schipper is another exception to the post-2000 pattern, with no significant injuries or surgery.

Bronte Campbell

Triple Olympian (2012, 2016 and 2020) Bronte Campbell sums up her relationship with injury with:

“I’ve been injured for five years, which is half of my swimming career..”[44]

The joints involved are listed below:

“The 25-year-old former world champion freestyler has a history of shoulder, neck and hip injuries and the 2019 season had a lot to do with rehabilitation and recovery.”[45]

Further details of the impact on her availability to compete are outlined in the below:

She was hampered by hip and shoulder injuries in the lead-up and during the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. She took two months out of the pool after the Games. She continued to suffer issues with her left shoulder and then her right in the lead-up to the 2017 World Championships in Budapest, Hungary. (swimswam.com, 06 Sep 2016, 23 Jul 2017)

She was hampered by a hip injury from November 2015 until February 2016. (au.news.yahoo.com, 05 Feb 2016)

She had glandular fever and chronic fatigue syndrome in 2010 that disrupted her career for two years. (smh.com.au, 10 Apr 2012)[46]

And not just one shoulder:

“Campbell, 23, struggled with inflammation in her left shoulder during the Olympic year and could only manage fourth in the Olympic final in Rio. And just when she began to feel she had that injury under some control, her right shoulder has gone.”[47]

She underwent shoulder surgery in 2018:

“However, injuries including her lingering shoulder issue that required surgery in 2018, conspired to ensure she had never re-scaled those heights.”[48]

Summary of the 2000-2020 Era

All these swimmers achieved great things in the pool as measured by the podium and the stopwatch. There is no question of that. The question I raise is ‘How good could they have been had they not suffered these injuries?’

A further challenge may be raised regarding the cause of the injury – some would suggest that shoulder injuries are ‘part and parcel’ of swimming. They didn’t use to be, at least not to this extent.

The pre-2000 cohort analysis (1980-2000)

In the absence of a third-party article, I can use to identify the ‘Top 10’ Australian female swimmers from 1980-2000, I include the following (listed alphabetically by surname), I apologize to any swimmers who perhaps should have been on the list. The intent is to provide a comparative sample.[49] Note also finding data on pre-2000 athletes is a challenge due to the relatively recent arrival of this platform:

Lisa Curry

Janelle Elford

Hayley Lewis

Eli Overton

Samantha Riley

Julie McDonald

Susie O’Neill

Nicole Stevenson

Petria Thomas

Karen van Wirdum

Summary of the 1980-2000 Era

Whilst the data pre-2000 is not as readily available as the post-2000 data due to the timing of the arrival of the internet, my professional experience combined with the limited data now available suggest the pre-2000 cohort had very limited incidence of competition threatening injury and surgery.

Comparative summary of both eras

The following table attempts to summarize and compare the injury statistics of these two cohorts.  The injuries included are indented to be training related injuries that caused loss of performance or ability to compete.  Both injury and surgery information are reliant upon that which is in public domain on the internet. The information for the pre 2000 cohort is more difficult to obtain.

Table 2 – Comparative analysis of injury and surgery between the pre-2000 and post-2000 Australia elite female swimming cohorts.

1980-2000 Injury Surgery 2000-2020 Injury Surgery
Lisa Curry

 

 Libby Trickett (nee Lenton)  

X

X
Janelle Elford Petria Thomas X X
Hayley Lewis Leisel Jones – –
Eli Overton Cate Campbell X X
Samantha Riley Emily Seebohm – –
Julie McDonald Jodie Henry X –
Susie O’Neill Stephanie Rice X X
Nicole Stevenson Alicia Coutts X –
Petria Thomas X X Jessica Schipper – –
Karen van Wirdum Bronte Campbell X X
Total 1/10 1/10 7/10 6/10
%age 10% 10%   70% 60%

Based on this analysis, the post-2000 cohort experienced performance and competition threatening injuries at a rate of 70% and surgery at 60%.

The pre-2000 cohort, based on the limited data available, experienced performance and competition threatening injuries at a rate of 10% and surgery at 10%.

Irrespective of the limitations of finding injury and surgery information about the pre-2000 cohort, and not withstanding any information that may come to light about the injuries of the pre-2000 cohort in the future, its fair to say there is a significant difference between the injury and surgery statistics of the pre-2000 cohort compared to the post-2000 cohort.

Put simply, there is a significant difference between the two cohorts in these measurements.

The next question is why? Many would justify the post-2000 cohort injuries and surgeries by saying look at the stop-watch – they are swimming faster and that is the price you pay.

Which leads to a second question, which I have not seen being proposed elsewhere – could  the performance improvements of the post 2000 cohort relative to the pre-2000 cohort have been achieved without such a dramatic lift in injury and surgery?

That is a subjective conclusion and I will leave that to the values of the modern day swim coach.

Swimming techniques may have changed, and average meter/second speed in training may have changed. However, I am not sure if any of these changes account for the changes in injury incidence and severity.

Let’s be clear – this is a non-impact sport – apart from the risk of swimming into the wall, the athletes don’t bang bodies as they do in classic impact sport. Nor is their gravity impact – the swimmers are in a medium where they are supported in part by the water.  The most significant impact is the drive off the blocks or wall in the starts, and the push-off the way in the turns.

The length of the pool the same. The medium – water – the same.  The events – very similar. The competition schedule is similar. States, Nationals, Pan Pac’s, Commonwealth Games, Olympic Games.

So what has really changed between the training of both cohorts? The training? If so, is it the swimming training or the dryland training?

In relation to training, I suggest that the swimming training frequency and volume are not the difference. I suggest the most significant difference is the time spend in ‘dry-land training’ and the type. The average post-2000 cohort swimmer is performing maximal strength training three times a week all year around, a frequency that was not apparent in the pre-2000 era. The pre-2000 era may have conducted that frequency of dryland work but it was more literally by the pool, and bodyweight exercises.

The type of dryland training has changed in that in the pre-2000 ear the dryland training was more about circuits of bodyweight exercises. In the post-2000 era, a premium is placed on load displacement in the non-specific strength training exercises.

Secondly, in relation to flexibility training, swimming appears to have bought into the ‘all-sports just happen to think the same way’ paradigm that if any static stretching is to be done, it should only be done after training.

Thirdly it is possible that the post-2000 cohort may be doing more ‘cross-training’ than the pre-2000 cohort, to comply with the paradigm that ‘professional athletes’ have to do more training. So perhaps there are more road runs, more stationary cycles and rowing ergometers beside the pool.

Swimming has perhaps yet to work out how to achieve the advantages of dryland training, especially maximum strength training methods, combined with low injury incidence, minimal surgery and the avoidance of career-ending injuries, as experienced by the pre-2000 cohort.

This performance vs. injury trade-off dilemma/challenge is faced by all sports who have passed the tipping point in US-influenced physical preparation.

Conclusion

Yes, swimming is tough on the swimmer’s body. The initial goal of physical preparation is to prevent injuries, not compound them. I suggest this pattern underlines that is exactly what has happened since the tipping point of embracing strength training in swimming post-2000.

Another argument proposed may be that ‘the sport has changed’. The swimming pool is still 50 meters long, and there is nothing about the impact with the water that would explain shoulder injuries akin to contact sport injuries, such that they result in surgery.

Another argument proposed maybe that ‘Australia’s post-2000 cohort of elite female swimmers are achieving higher world rankings than the pre-2000 cohort’.  If this were true, does that demand the injury and surgery rate? Or could this performance be achieved with lower rates? The answer to that question alone creates a self-fulfilling outcome.

In my opinion, there are lessons here. I believe that that the injury and surgery incidence has increased beyond what can be justified.

Perhaps no one else is alarmed by this or sees the same concerns.

Either way, the lesson is not being used to serve sports or athletes within these sports that come along later.

This means the next generation of athletes and the sports I describe as late arrivals to physical preparation, especially the US version called ‘strength & conditioning’ will suffer the same fate.

I am sure they would have preferred if someone warned them about the hot water they may be about to get themselves in.

Something like this – ‘At the moment if you achieve your goals and reach elite status (in female swimming) AND keep doing what they (and basically everyone in sport) are currently doing, you have a 70% chance of experiencing performance and competition threatening injuries and a 60% chance of surgery. And a comparison to the generation before suggests that the next generation will probably be at 90 and 100% respectively. Unless things change….’

That’s a message that should be passed on.

 

References

[1] https://www.economist.com/free-exchange/2009/07/13/the-original-tipping-point-wasnt-one

[2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tipping%20point

[3] Barker, J., 1993, Paradigms: The Business of Discovering the Future Paperback – May 26, 1993

[4] https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/turning%20point

[5] https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/swoop/rio-2016-susie-oneill-to-libby-trickett-and-steph-rice-top-aussie-female-swimmers-since-2000/news-story/d9240b9a40e5e7ff5097f9770fca4405

[6] https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/libby-tricketts-cold-turkey-approach-to-relay-fight/news-story/694d8d397af4c63305ce03213318359a

[7] https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/libby-tricketts-cold-turkey-approach-to-relay-fight/news-story/694d8d397af4c63305ce03213318359a

[8] https://www.kalminer.com.au/news/goldfields/tricketts-focus-on-glasgow-ng-ya-284150

[9] https://hope1032.com.au/stories/life/inspirational-stories/2019/aussie-olympian-libby-trickett-opens-up-about-her-mental-health-struggles/

[10] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7517073/Libby-Tricketts-sudden-retirement-pool-confronting-truth.html

[11] https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/trickett-up-to-the-weight-of-expectations/news-story/276c2e1074796e951e46c825bf38bb2f

[12] https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/four-hour-shoulder-operation-a-success-for-olympic-great-petria-thomas/

[13] https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/four-hour-shoulder-operation-a-success-for-olympic-great-petria-thomas/

[14] http://www.womenaustralia.info/exhib/sg/thomas.html

[15] https://www.news.com.au/sport/olympics/swimming/hurtful-dawn-fraser-sledge-leisel-jones-still-cant-get-over/news-story/e7f81f5c30e6090142a47abf237c25d2

[16] https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/how-i-look-like-i-do-leisel-jones/news-story/66a71b34c994f1c758bb731a765f981a

[17] https://olympics.com/tokyo-2020/olympic-games/en/results/swimming/athlete-profile-n1482861-campbell-cate.htm

[18] https://www.foxsports.com.au/news/cate-campbell-to-undergo-shoulder-surgery-after-starring-role-at-pan-pacs-with-rio-2016-on-the-horizon/news-story/3b98b78fabf72ec414ff0ce53dce2a41

[19] https://www.sbs.com.au/news/bronte-campbell-battles-shoulder-injury

[20] https://swimswam.com/cate-campbell-undergo-hernia-surgery-upon-return-rio/

[21] https://www.scmp.com/sport/other-sport/article/2007791/no-excuses-australias-cate-campbell-swam-hernia-olympic-games

[22] https://www.foxsports.com.au/news/cate-campbell-to-undergo-shoulder-surgery-after-starring-role-at-pan-pacs-with-rio-2016-on-the-horizon/news-story/3b98b78fabf72ec414ff0ce53dce2a41

[23] https://swimswam.com/australias-emily-seebohm-suffers-knee-dislocation/

[24] https://www.fina.org/athletes/1000096/emily-seebohm/profile

[25] https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/how-an-eating-disorder-nearly-ended-seebohms-swimming-career/news-story/2715dd0679644965018eb77ae343d10c

[26] https://www.espn.com.au/olympics/swimming/news/story?id=3269786

[27] https://www.theage.com.au/sport/henry-refuses-to-retire-20080301-ge6sdz.html

[28] https://www.theage.com.au/sport/henry-refuses-to-retire-20080301-ge6sdz.html

[29] https://www.olympics.com.au/news/athens-golden-girl-retires/

[30] https://www.sbs.com.au/news/tearful-rice-quits-games-for-surgery

[31] https://www.sbs.com.au/news/tearful-rice-quits-games-for-surgery

[32] https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-rice-has-right-shoulder-surgery-2010sep01-story.html

[33] https://swimswam.com/stephanie-rice-undergoes-second-minor-shoulder-surgery/

[34] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/09/australian-olympic-swimmer-stephanie-rice-retirement

[35] https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/shoulder-hurting-stephanie-rices-london-hopes-ng-3534790be8aa2e2415f9d3d363ff70c8

[36] https://www.smh.com.au/sport/injured-shoulder-an-olympics-concern-for-stephanie-rice-20120210-1sdr4.html

[37] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Rice

[38] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/09/australian-olympic-swimmer-stephanie-rice-retirement

[39] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/09/australian-olympic-swimmer-stephanie-rice-retirement

[40] https://www.fina.org/athletes/1006023/alicia-coutts/profile

[41] https://www.espn.com.au/olympics/story/_/id/14897629/alicia-coutts-ready-make-splash-nsw-meet

[42] https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/10/australias-emma-mckeon-claims-bronze-as-alicia-coutts-signs-off-olympic-career

[43] https://www.olympics.com.au/news/triple-olympian-coutts-bids-farewell-to-swimming/

[44] https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jun/05/bronte-campbell-ive-been-injured-for-five-years-half-my-swimming-career

[45] https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/bronte-campbell-counts-blessings-of-olympic-delay-that-grant-injuries-more-time-to-heal/

[46] https://olympics.com/tokyo-2020/olympic-games/en/results/swimming/athlete-profile-n1482860-campbell-bronte.htm

[47] https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/injuries-cast-doubt-on-bronte-campbells-50m-100m-defence/news-story/51890d3b1684e4868b13f825417b21c8

[48] https://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/6218777/bronte-campbell-seals-swim-titles-berth/

[49] Note that this list is intended to include swimmers whose careers spanned both the 1980s and 1990s

Ian King

A lament for the late arrivals

/by

In the modern history of athletic preparation, there has been growing consideration for physical preparation. What the Americans call ‘strength & conditioning’. It may not be accurate to suggest that physical preparation is a new concept. The interpretation of the stories of the Greek athlete Milo of Croton from 6th BC gives support to a longer history.

However physical preparation has changed a lot in the forty-plus years during my professional involvement in sport.

A review of literature review reveals that track and field and then American football led the way in embracing physical preparation during the last century, especially the American version of physical preparation where ‘strength training’ dominants, literally and figuratively (i.e. in the title – strength… and then conditioning).

As surprising as it seems to the younger generation these were the only sports up until about 1980 in the US and 1990 in Australia that fully embraced the American interpretation of physical preparation.

Post 1980 (North America) and 1990 (Asia Pacific) a new wave embraced the American interpretation of physical preparation. Power and mixed energy sports such as most field sports e.g. rugby union, rugby league, Australian Rules Football, to name a few Australian based sports.

I call this the second wave.

Post 2000 there was a third wave that involved sports such as swimming. Some may suggest that swimming embraced strength training earlier – not based on my experiences working with both US and Australian-based swimmers. Let’s just say the discussions in the national team environment, that I was party to, were not favorable in the direction of strength training for swimming. I did not see any real acceptance of this until post 2000, and I include observations of coaching protocols as well as the content being shared at the annual Australian Swim Coaches Association (as it was known then) conventions.

Post 2010 there was a fourth wave that involved sports with great balance and less direct relationship with swimming e.g. surfing, off-road motorcycle racing. I call these the late arrivals.

There is I suggest a pattern to the sequence of acceptance by sports of the American influenced ‘strength and conditioning’. From sports where strength training plays a bigger role through to sports where strength training plays a lessor role.

Table 1 – Four waves of sports that embraced physical preparation.

Phase USA Australia Sports
1 – Early embracers <1980 <1980 Track # field, American football
2 – >1980 >1990 Power and mixed energy sports e.g. rugby, Australian Rules
3 – >2000 >2000 Diverse medium sports e.g. swimming
4 – Late arrivals >2010 >2010 Displacement, balance and more coordination-based sports e.g. off-road motorcycle disciplines

©King, I., 2021

Put simply, there is a reason they are late arrivals. And therefore, blind acceptance and embracing of methodology applied in all other sports has even more potential downsides the further along the continuum you go.

I feel for the late arrivals, and I lament the collateral damage they are potentially walking into. To see they feel, they are being more ‘professional’ by the mere act of ‘going to the gym’ and embracing the same training values as their predecessors sports is hurtful to watch.

There is a reason certain sports were later to the ‘strength training’ party, and if you fail to respect that and fail to reflect and consider more optimal ways, then these sports will pay the biggest price of them all. And I suggest it is happening.

Firstly, if the lessons of the last century of strength training for sport were made available. However, they are not.

Let me give an example. There would be very few swimming coaches in the Australian high-performance environment alive and coaching today who were around in the 1960s when Australian swim coaches began their initial flirtation with strength training. They learned certain things and reacted appropriately, pulling back from this modality, in at least the way it was being done. I base these observations on personal discussions with the late John Carew. I doubt too many if any of the current Australian elite swim coaches have had such discussions. The lessons have been lost.

The outcome is increased injuries and decreased performance. The exact opposite to the proclaimed benefits of ‘strength and conditioning’. A great example of this is Australian rugby, where it’s been nearly 20 years since Australia beat the New Zealand All Blacks for the cherished Bledisloe Cup, and the nation has sunk to a historic low world ranking of 7th in recent years. There are reasons for this, and a big part of this I suggest is the misguided off-field training resulting in decreased performance potential and increased injury incidence and severity.

It’s tough to beat a nation where the players may be more culturally and genetically suited to the game when your off-field training is letting you down.

Secondly, it may also be fine if strength training for sport, the American way, has evolved well past the programs used for American football. However, I suggest they have not.

Again, in anticipation of challenges to my last statement, let me give you an example – a golf scholarship athlete at a Div. 1 US NCAA college given the exact program as the American football team at the same college – post 2010…

Many American football players do not run far, do not touch the ball and so. If you are not playing American football and conduct your off-field training in a way that is heavily influenced, you will pay a price. And I suggest that is happening.

However how many were around in the 1970s transition to the 1980s in physical preparation to know from a personal/ professional perspective what had transpired in the formation of the American interpretation of physical preparation. Not many. The lessons have been lost.

All athletes want to play, and some want to play at the higher levels. In this pursuit, they seek additional and ‘new’ ways to train, to gain confidence they are ‘on track’ e.g., training like ‘all the other pro’s’.

I feel for the late arrivals, and I lament the collateral damage they are potentially walking into. There should have been a better message for you by now, however there is not. Tread carefully.

Ideally, I should be saving I hope your non-specific (physical preparation) training helps you thrive. That would be nice. However, based on my experience and observations – what I know – if you do what the rest of your colleagues are doing in their interpretation of the best way to train, survive may be a more appropriate term.

You deserve better. Our profession has failed to deliver safe training, let alone optimal training. Now it’s up to you to be more discerning. Don’t assume. Don’t imitate. Seek answers, dig deeper, objectively question and interpret the cause-effect relationship of what you are seeing and doing. Be more scientific in your review than our profession is.

Your future depends on it.

And not just your sporting future.

Ian King

Still hamstrung, after all these years

/by

The story goes that back in about the 1970s two high level bodybuilders agreed to a sprint race, and during that sprint race they both tore hamstrings.

This story entertained many, however I took a more serious lesson from it.

Combined with my observations of the shift in posture from the 1960s to the 1970s bodybuilder and took into account that the clients I served displaced further and faster that the average bodybuilder, alarm bells were ringing.

The development of the Lines of Movement Concept (especially the hip vs quad dominant component was a direct response to my concerns about injury potential from muscle balance.  As was the introduction and innovation of bodyweight and unilateral exercises into strength training in a way that was considered unconventional at the time (however since 2000 have become the backbone of the so-called ‘functional training’ movement). [1]

Or you can learn about it second hand, however I suggest the power of the message may have been diluted in these versions.

That’s just not my biased opinion – that an observation of the direction of injuries globally.

So in the 1980s I  committed to ensuring the muscle imbalances evident from mainstream strength training trends would not be part of the life of athletes I worked with.

Decades later I look back with confirmation that my Zero Tolerance approach to injuries, especially soft tissue injuries, has been successful.

Successful for athletes that I have worked with during the past four decades. However, the message, even with the concept being republished endlessly by others, has not been successful.

It appears humans are still struggling to prevent simple yet debilitating injuries such as hamstring strains.

These soft tissue injuries are predictable, preventable, unnecessary and non-productive.

Recently at an off-road motorcycling competition I observed a rider enter the pits prematurely and heard him declare he has torn his hamstring.  I was more than intrigued, mixed with the usual compassion for the athlete.  He had torn his hamstring on a motorbike?

As a student of injury prevention, not only did I provide care and guidance over the next hour, I tested my hypothesis as I typically do with a series of questions to the rider.

My conclusion – just another victim of mainstream training paradigms. He was buffed. Anyone male would be proud of the physique he had developed. But stretching? No, not much of that. I checked out his all-important quads and they were rocks. They looked great.   A real Men’s Health model candidate. However, the rest of the body was suffering for the training outcome he had produced – especially the hamstrings.

At first he was keen to tell me had been tight all is his life. That was shut down quickly with his – and to his credit – acknowledgement he had not done much to change this.

Then he went down the path of ‘I am a rower and that is why I am tight’. That was shut down quickly when I raised some of the elite rowers I had worked with, and that I had failed to observe tightness as a common theme in rowers.

Once we got through the excuses and the defense mechanisms and got to hear how he trained – there were no surprise. He had absorbed the current paradigms of training and was just another victim of the times.

There is no shortage of statistics on the extent of hamstring injury; Here are a few collated by Eirale C. and Ekstrand (2019)[2]:

  • Epidemiological studies assessing sports constantly rank hamstring injuries as one of the most prevalent factors resulting in missed playing time by athletes.[3] [4] [5]
  • Hamstring ‘strains’ account for a substantial percentage of acute, sports related musculoskeletal injuries with a prevalence of 6 to 25%, depending on the sport. [6]
  • Hamstring strains are far more common in positions in which sprinting is more often required.[7] [8] [9]
  • A survey of the UEFA Champions League showed that muscle injuries make up more than 30% of all player injuries and cause about 1/4 of total time lost due to injury.[10]
  • Over 90% of muscle injuries seen in this study involved four major muscle groups of the lower extremity: hamstrings, adductors, quadriceps and gastrocnemius. [11]
  • Injury to the hamstring muscle group is reported to be the most common injury subtype representing 12% of all injuries and more than 1/3 of all strains.[12]
  • A professional male soccer team with 25 players may expect about five hamstring injuries each season, equivalent to more than 80 lost football days and 14 missed matches.[13]
  • In soccer injury to the hamstring muscle group is reported to be the most common injury subtype representing 12% of all injuries and more than 1/3 of all strains.[14]
  • In a track and field sprinting study the most frequent diagnosis was hamstring strain.[15] For example, thigh strain was the most common diagnosis (16%) in sports injury surveillance studies at the 2007, 2009 and 2011 IAAF (International Association of Athletics Federations) World Athletics Championships.[16] [17] [18]
  • In the American football muscle strains account for 46% of practice injuries and 22% of pre-season game injuries, the second most common pre-season injury.[19]
  • More than half (53.1%) of all hamstring injuries in American football occurred in the 7-week pre-season, before the teams had even played their first regular-season game.[20]

And there is also no shortage of claimed causes and preventions. Perhaps the most popular of these is described in the following statement:“The best evidence for injury prevention is available for programmes designed to increase hamstring strength, particularly eccentric hamstrings strength.”[21]

So, what impact have all these theories and research had on hamstring injury incidence?

“Despite a massive amount of recent research and consequent prevention programmes, hamstring injury incidence is not decreasing.” [22]:

I shake my head as to why the sporting world is still plagued by soft tissue injuries. Everyone now wants to be a ‘injury rehab specialist’ – yet no-one wants to be an ‘injury prevention’ advocate.

Perhaps it is understandable, when you search the ‘web you find so many articles, website and experts purporting to have the education to prevent hamstring injuries. I am very uninterested in theories. I want to know of sporting seasons with high volumes of athletes and minimal if any soft tissue injuries. That’s the only evidence that matters.

Soft tissue injuries such as hamstring strains are completely optional and unnecessary. It’s pretty easy to make them extinct or near extinct. Yet they continue.

Two things are apparent to me – the rise in soft tissue injuries, and the concurrent rise in funding and research on how to prevent them has been ineffective.

Yet the ‘search’ continues. The NFL has just allocated $4m USD (yes, 4 million) to:

“…fund a team of medical researchers led by the University of Wisconsin” to “investigate the prevention and treatment of hamstring injuries for elite football players.” [23]

The NFL has had only one century to solve the mystery of hamstrings…[24]

This statement was made in relation to this research:

“The persistent symptoms, slow healing, and a high rate of re-injury make hamstring strains a frustrating and disabling injury for athletes and a challenge for sport medicine clinicians to treat,” said Dr. Bryan Heiderscheit, PT, PhD, FAPTA, Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.” [25]

I agree it would be frustrating for the athletes – if they were trained in a manner that resulted in hamstring strains. I agree it would be a challenge for sports medicine clinicians to treat – if they didn’t know how to prevent and rehabilitate them on the rare occasions they might occur.

However, I don’t agree with the following suggestion in relation to the recent NFL funding:

“To truly understand and reduce hamstring injury risk requires a study of an unprecedented size and scope.”

And what will it result in? Will it solve the leagues 100 years search for answers to hamstring strains? Let’s review the hamstring strain stats in the NFL in about a decade. That should be enough time.

I have my predictions, and I am sure they differ from those invested in the ‘research’ of hamstring strains. Our profession has been ‘researching’ hamstring strains for decades, and I suggest that it has not resulted in a downturn in hamstring incidence.

But you don’t need my opinion. The statistics tell the story.

It appears the world is still hamstrung, after all these years.

 

References

[1] You can learn more about these concepts in the original writings of How to Write (1998) and How to Teach (2000), the Legacy book (2018) or the KSI Coaching Courses.

[2] Eirale C. and Ekstrand, J.,  2019, Hamstrings are dangerous for sport and sport is dangerous for hamstrings, Aspetar Sports Medicine Journal, Vol. 8, p. 438-444.

[3] Ekstrand J, Healy JC, Walden M, Lee JC, English B, Hagglund M. Hamstring muscle injuries in professional football: the correlation of MRI findings with return to play. Br J Sports Med 2012; 46:112-117.

[4] Orchard JW. Intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors for muscle strains in Australian football. Am J Sports Med 2001; 29:300- 303.

[5] Eirale C, Farooq A, Smiley FA, Tol JL, Chalabi H. Epidemiology of football injuries in Asia: a prospective study in Qatar. J Sci Med Sport 2013; 16:113-117.

[6] Heiderscheit BC, Sherry MA, Silder A, Chumanov ES, Thelen DG. Hamstring strain injuries: recommendations for diagnosis, rehabilitation, and injury prevention. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010; 40:67-81.

[7] Elliott MC, Zarins B, Powell JW, Kenyon CD. Hamstring muscle strains in professional football players: a 10-year review. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:843-850.

[8] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer). Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:1226-1232

[9] Orchard JW, Seward H, Orchard JJ. Results of 2 decades of injury surveillance and public release of data in the Australian football league. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41:734-741.

[10] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. In jury incidence and injury patterns in professional football: the UEFA injury study. Br J Sports Med 2011; 45:553-558.

[11] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer). Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:1226-1232.

[12] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer). Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:1226-1232.

[13] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer). Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:1226-1232.

[14] Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer). Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:1226-1232.

[15] Jacobsson J, Timpka T, Kowalski J, Nilsson S, Ekberg J, Renstrom P. Prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries in Swedish elite track and field athletes. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40:163-169.

[16] Alonso JM, Junge A, Renstrom P, Engebretsen L, Mountjoy M, Dvorak J. Sports injuries surveillance during the 2007 IAAF World Athletics Championships. Clin J Sport Med 2009; 19:26-32.

[17] Alonso JM, Tscholl PM, Engebretsen L, Mountjoy M, Dvorak J, Junge A. Occurrence of injuries and illnesses during the 2009 IAAF World Athletics Championships. Br J Sports Med 2010; 44:1100-1105.

[18] Alonso JM, Edouard P, Fischetto G, Adams B, Depiesse F, Mountjoy M. Determination of future prevention strategies in elite track and field: analysis of Daegu 2011 IAAF Championships injuries and illnesses surveillance. Br J Sports Med 2012; 46:505-514.

[19] Feeley BT, Kennelly S, Barnes RP, Muller MS, Kelly BT, Rodeo SA. Epidemiology of National Football League training camp injuries from 1998 to 2007. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36:1597-1603.

[20] Elliott MC, Zarins B, Powell JW, Kenyon CD. Hamstring muscle strains in professional football players: a 10-year review. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39:843-850.

[21] Bahr, R., 2019, Prevention hamstring strains – a current view of literature, Aspetar Sports Medicine Journal, Vol. 8

[22] Eirale C. and Ekstrand, J.,  2019, Hamstrings are dangerous for sport and sport is dangerous for hamstrings, Aspetar Sports Medicine Journal, Vol. 8, p. 438-444.

[23] https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-scientific-advisory-board-awards-4-million-research-funding-hamstring

[24] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League

[25] https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-scientific-advisory-board-awards-4-million-research-funding-hamstring

Ian King

Reflections on the Get Buffed!™ programs journey – origins, reactions and impact

/by

It’s been 21 years (1999) since the first Get Buffed!™ program was released. A lot has happened in that time, and we have a lot to talk about!  You can break this journey down into three periods – the origins, the reactions and the impact.

The program and its unique concept have changed the way the world trains, but it could do more. It has potentially underperformed, and I outline my thoughts about why I say that below.

The origins of the Get Buffed!™ program

The original Get Buffed!™ program was based on a lifetime of training and at the time in 1999, my prior 19 years of professional and experiences developing, testing, refining and reaching conclusion in the quest to optimize athlete performance.

There were many key influences in shaping the Get Buffed!™ program and I sought to credit and reference them where appropriate, an act that has lost relevance apparently post 2000.

Some of my key mentors included the local strongman on the island I grew up in the South Pacific Ocean, my high school teachers, my first ‘boss’ in the industry at the university I commenced at in 1980, my training partners in the weightlifting club I that I trained with during the ensuing decade.

Some of my influences included the few books available at the time, the magazines I was exposed to in the 1980s and 1990, and the strength athletes with the results to show. It was a different era – only those with obvious results would be promoted as role models, unlike the post 2000 era when individuals who lacked such personal success and commitment to their own training were given the platform via the internet to become strength training experts and authors.

The reaction to the Get Buffed!™ program

The world had not seen anything like the Get Buffed!™ program before, and the reaction was predictable – first it was ridiculed, then it was violently opposed, and then it became accepted as if everyone ‘always knew it’. Just as German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer described new ‘truths’ are treated!

The ridicule was directed at many aspects of the program but for the most part the fact that it involved bodyweight exercises. No-one was integrating bodyweight exercises into heavy duty strength training programs and the appetite for the concept was low. The typical response was ‘how could you get big and strong doing just bodyweight?

To overcome this skepticism supporters wrote encouragement such as:

The following article is Part I of a two-part leg training article that’s very different from anything you’ve ever done. How so? Well, for starters, some of the exercises don’t even require you to use any weight beyond that of what you’ve got piled on top of your hip bones and dressed up in a Tommy Hilfiger shirt. Secondly, this workout has a nasty side effect. It hurts. Real bad.

Cast aside your skepticism and try the following workout this week. Part II will follow next week.[1]

Editor’s note: I tried Parts I and II of Ian’s workout this past week. It’s really unique, and I felt that I had blasted my legs. Of course, the most difficult part of the workout was shrugging off years of brainwashing. Doing exercises with little or no weight was a hard pill to swallow, but once I reminded myself that I didn’t care how different or weird the movements looked, I had a great workout. Remember, screw the pack mentality and give this workout a try! [2]

The next phase was violent opposition. It only took a year or so to get here, and it was led by those whose apple carts had been upturned by the concepts built into the program.

The guru that ran NY was incensed when his disciples told how I had suggested at a seminar in about 2000 in NYC that chin ups didn’t balance out bench pressing. This guru’s programs were totally devoid of horizontal pulling (e.g. rows) and this didn’t sit well.  The immediate reactions included a banning of all that Guru’s disciplines from attending my seminars. Seminar attendance in North America was down by 50% as a result. The interim approach was to tell the disciples that if they ordered any of our educational material, when the parcel arrived, they would get arrested. Go figure!?  He had his Lieutenants tell people I was about to be arrested! And the long-term play was the release of a ‘modified’ exercise that would ‘fix’ the problem without changing the exercise selection – so still no need to row…Learn exactly what that exercise was during the upcoming webinar.

New York was not the only push back experience. The Boston Guru had his own approach. Again, incensed at the content of a live seminar because it was very different to what he was doing, he arranged a mid-seminar walkout of his disciples and successfully intimidated the seminar host to never host my seminars again. But it was his long-term play that shocked me – learn about that in the upcoming seminar!

Then the final phase was characterized the trend spotters pumping out material that looked very ‘similar’. When questioned about the origin the typical response was ‘we are just going back to stuff that has always been around.  For example, when teaching bodyweight exercises straight out of the Get Buffed!™ program, book and DVD, under the guise of ‘your body is a barbell’ a presenter in 2003 was asked:

Q. This is so perfect for me…I am very limited in what I could take. You say you steal everything, where did you steal this stuff from?

 A. Um, God [looks up at heavens], I steal from a lot of people. Er, some stuff from Ian King. Um, a lot of stuff from Paul Chek. And just the older stuff, like when you go back and read like early training manuals, this stuff is nothing new, like we didn’t invent it, it’s just that its been forgotten about, so we are going back to get it….[3]

These early imitations were. then followed by the ‘functional training movement’, and I will address this at length in the upcoming webinar.

Suffice to say, it’s been the classic over-reaction I spoke about when I coined the saying:

One of my passions is the study of futurism and human behavior. As such I had developed a saying based upon this study, about how humans’ reaction to new ideas in the short and long term.[4]

It is also appropriate to remind you of the natural human and social reactions – an over-reaction in the short term and an under-reaction in the long term.  When a ‘new’ thing becomes popular, many over-promote it and many over use it. [5]

And there you have the three stages, moved through in a matter of years. It was quick.

It was also really messed up, because those who were at the forefront of wanting to benefit from the acceptance of the concepts introduced in the Get Buffed!™  program didn’t have the connection with and the experience in the training methods, concepts and exercises. It was more about the benefit to them from being the message bringer than a desire to bring the message in its intended format. More insights into this during the upcoming webinar.

The longer term impact of Get Buffed!™ program

We have received unsolicited testimonials from so many about the positive impact of the Get Buffed!™ program, and that have been veery rewarding to know of this positive impact.  However there has been another side to this impact.

In hindsight I realize that the concepts and innovations I shared with the release in 1999 of the Get Buffed!™ program had some longer-term impacts I failed to anticipate.

There is the opportunity to correct these impacts however they may never be fully removed.

To illustrate this point I will take about a few exercises and training concepts. I will discuss the origins of these and other unique exercises during the webinar.

The popularization of the Roman Deadlift, with its flat back, appears to have contributed to the demise of the traditional and more valuable bent knee deadlift. Post 2000, if you ask anyone – from industry professional to end user – to show you what a deadlift was, I found them demonstrating the flat back version.  There are many other factors that have been involved, including the difficulty of teaching/learning the bent knee deadlift, and the injury risks associated with a poorly executed bent knee deadlift. However I believe that light that was shone on the flat-backed version aka the Romanian Deadlift was, tragically, a large contributor to this shift.

As a further side effect of this has been the sending of the round-back good morning to the sin bin, as popular as static stretching in the current paradigm environment. More on that in the webinar!

The single leg stiff legged deadlift was bastardized very quickly after release (more on that in the seminar) and the result has been nothing more than tragic. Because I get to travel the world and visit many training facilities, it’s been hurtful to see the embracing of this misinterpretation of this incredible exercise – which is more like a ballet move than what I had created.  It may be too late to undo this mess, but we can help those committed to learning the intent and receiving the benefits!

The championing of the Bulgarian Squat has led to what I campaigned for so long to avoid and part of the driving force behind the Lines of Movement concept I developed (hip and quad, vertical and horizontal push and pull categorization – the over-training of the quad dominant muscle group. (Yes, that is what I said – the ‘quad dominant muscle group’! Not the ‘knee dominant’ exercises, and that’s a story we might get into in the webinar also!). A great exercise for sure, however when you give more sugar to a diabetic, it doesn’t end well…

The Lines of Movement concept was borne out of my observations of the trends in shape change in leading strength exponents, specifically bodybuilders. Not only have we failed to prevent the two key muscle/joint imbalances I sought to address through this concept, the promotion of unilateral work and the presentation of the concept of exercise classification has led to a tragic side-effect.

Uni-lateral exercise has been around forever, however it was not a focus or feature of western world training until the arrival of the Get Buffed!™ program.  Exercise classification up until the release of the Get Buffed!™ program was limited to muscle groups.

For example, this is my leg day. No split between quad and hip dominant. This is my chest, shoulder, and triceps day. No recognition of planes of movement. The ‘Lines of Movement’ concept changed this.

However, the ongoing search for a better ‘mouse-trap’ by those seeking significance more than seeking to solve an existing problem, has let to new patterns of physical dysfunction that were non-existent in the 1980s, when I developed the exercise categorization of Lines of Movement.  Two new dysfunction epidemics have evolved that I didn’t see coming, leaving the majority with now the ‘Big Four’ musculo-skeletal dysfunctions, and I will speak about them in the webinar.

That’s heartbreaking for me – to think that I introduced an exercise categorization concept to combat the ‘Big Two’ of the 1980s, only to responsible (indirectly) for the ‘Big Four’ decades later.

Conclusion

So there you have it – 21 years since the first Get Buffed!™ program was released and the journey since– the origin, the response and the longer term impact.  Four Get Buffed books (the only four book sequel in this genre I am aware of) and thirteen DVDs later! And more to come…

Join the discussion on the upcoming webinar and training camp where we will take a deep dive into all things Get Buffed!™

 

Webinar Options

21 reflections on the journey – origins, response and impact of the Get Buffed!™ programs!

Celebrating 21 years of Get Buffed!™

Webinar Option 1 – Evening in the Americas, daytime in Asia Pacific

Webinar Option 2 – Evening in Asia Pacific, daytime in Europe

Join the upcoming Get Buffed! Training Camp

 

References

[1] TC Louma, 1999, in the introduction to my workout A in my unique bodyweight based strength and bodybuilding program, a pioneer program at that time, Editor T-mag.com, Sep 17 1999

[2] TC Louma, 1999,, in the conclusion to Workout B of my unique bodyweight based strength and bodybuilding program, a pioneer program at that time…., Editor T-mag.com, Sep 24 1999

[3] Cosgrove, A., 2003, Your body as a barbell – unconventional bodyweight exercises, DVD, 18 Oct 2003, at Charles Staley Bootcamp

[4] King, I., 2010, Barbells & Bullshit (Book), Chapter 3 – Those sayings look familiar?!, p. 13

[5] King, I., 2002, Heavy Metal Q & A, T-mag.com, 30 Oct

Ian King

The Barbell Hip Thrust – Winners and Losers

/by

I was receiving requests from some of my coaches to write about the barbell hip thrust. They knew I didn’t buy into it, yet I had remained silent.  They were tiring of the market pressure for them to conform, and wanted me to make a statement.

So I began to prepare, to research.

Didn’t take me long to realize I didn’t need to write an article about this exercise. There are already enough good ones out there. [1] [2] [3] [4]

What I have chosen to do instead is speak to the generation that ‘invented’, endorsed and more pertinently marketed this concept.

According to the number one advocate and ‘originator’ of the exercise, it all began in about 2006.

Almost 11 years ago, I thought up the barbell hip thrust in my garage gym in Scottsdale, Arizona. [5]

So in about 2008, this coach had a ‘bright idea’, apparently. Coach and writer Kim Goss has a different perspective on the history of this lift. [1]

Since then, I’ve been on a mission to popularize the movement….  took this information and ran with it, posting numerous article links and infographics on my social media channels relaying the news that hip thrusts are very well-suited for improving speed and that the force vector hypothesis was legitimate.[5]

Now the first ‘coach’ referred to above is a great marketer.  I like to give credit where credit is due. The world adopted the movement.  Not that they appear to need my acknowledgement. Enough acknowledgment was evident:

…I recently polled my newsletter list and social media followers and received over 7,600 responses as follow……As a prolific S&C educator with a large online following who gets rewarded for being “ahead of the research,” making bold predictions, and playing to the masses…

Rewards? Sounds like a game of winners and losers. And that may be accurate….

Then the bombshell. Some of his academic colleagues failed to support his own earlier studies.[7] [8]  (And yes, the research undermining this exercise may have its own flaws, but no more than the original ‘research’ used to support it…)

Now the retraction did show humility and gained respect from some quarters.

Unfortunately, I spoke too soon. The combination of 1) my inherent biases as an inventor, 2) my role as an online educator always seeking to provide cutting edge information to my followers, and 3) my greenness as a scientist prevented me from exhibiting a more tempered approach to the emerging evidence.[9]

Here’s my challenge.

How many of the athletes and coaches currently engaging in this exercise are aware of this reversal of support and admission of  ‘jumping the gun’? Not many.

Will the impact of this incredible marketing of this exercise go on for generations? Yes. 

Who takes responsibility? No-one.

Who cares? Not enough people. Their too busy moving on to the next way of becoming significant or popular.

Now I understand no-one really wants unsolicited advice, however to those keen to be significant – I express my hope that a few more may first reflect upon the impact of what they market before they met their needs to be significant.

Now I am not suggesting that validation through science is needed before sharing an innovation. I personally don’t.  Science is often a lagging indicator, confirming or otherwise at a later date.   I would just recommend greater reflection or more transparency. If science is going to be invoked as a validation technique, you might want to have more than one of two ‘in-house studies’.

To the physical coach – please use the grey matter you were gifted by your Maker.  I know this plea will fall for the most part on deaf ears, for the same ailment that Dr. Albert Schweitzer lamented in the 1950s  remains. When he was asked by a reporter ‘Dr, what’s wrong with man today?’ he responded:

Man does not think. [10]

To the athlete – you need to be, and have a greater capability to me smarter about your training decisions than your physical coach. They have many masters – ego, colleagues to professional associations, marketing trends. You only have one agenda – the future health of your body and the fulfillment of your potential. Its okay to reach your own conclusions about what’s right for you, even if it differs from your coaches….

This rush to the market exemplifies one of the key reasons I have chosen historically to test a new concept for about a decade before publishing it….

A coach can ‘change their mind’ (even as they hope for a recovery) after marketing, publishing and endorsing something so effectively. [11] [12]

But the stain remains.

With influence comes responsibility.  

[1] Goss, K., 2016, The case against hip thrusts, The Poliquin Group, June 14, 2016, http://main.poliquingroup.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article/1478/The_Case_Against_the_Hip_Thrust.aspx

[2] Kavanaugh, J., The heavy hip thrust is ruining our backs and this industry, Speed and Sports Institute, https://www.sportandspeedteam.com/the-heavy-hip-thrust-is-ruining-our-backs-and-this-industry/

[3] Kechijian, D., 2017, Science’ and the Barbell Hip Thrust, Simplifaster, Sep 8, 2017, https://simplifaster.com/articles/barbell-hip-thrust/

[4] Valle, C., 2018, Should Advanced Athletes Use the Barbell Hip Thrust?, Simplifaster, Jan 29, 2018, https://simplifaster.com/articles/athletes-barbell-hip-thrust/

[5] Contreras, B., 2017, Science is self-correcting – The Case Of The Hip Thrust And Its Effects On Speed,  Bretcontreras.com, July 27, 2017, https://bretcontreras.com/science-is-self-correcting-the-case-of-the-hip-thrust-and-its-effects-on-speed/

[6] Contreras, B., 2017, Science is self-correcting – The Case Of The Hip Thrust And Its Effects On Speed,  Bretcontreras.com, July 27, 2017, https://bretcontreras.com/science-is-self-correcting-the-case-of-the-hip-thrust-and-its-effects-on-speed/

[7] Bishop, Chris, MSc; Cassone, Natasha, MSc; Jarvis, Paul, MSc; Turner, Anthony, PhD, CSCS*D; Chavda, Shyam, MSc, CSCS; Edwards, Mike, MSc, 2018, Heavy Barbell Hip Thrusts Do Not Effect Sprint Performance, An 8-Week Randomized–Controlled Study, The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · July 2017

[8] Kun-Han Lin, Chih-Min Wu, Yi-Ming Huang and Zong-Yan Cai, 2017, Effects of Hip Thrust Training on the Strength and Power Performance in Collegiate Baseball Players, Journal of Sports Science 5 (2017) 178-184

[9] Contreras, B., 2017, Science is self-correcting – The Case Of The Hip Thrust And Its Effects On Speed,  Bretcontreras.com, July 27, 2017, https://bretcontreras.com/science-is-self-correcting-the-case-of-the-hip-thrust-and-its-effects-on-speed/

[10] Schweitzer, A., in Nightingale, E., 1975, The strangest secret, Nighingale-Conant.

[11] Contreras, B., 2017, Science is self-correcting – The Case Of The Hip Thrust And Its Effects On Speed,  Bretcontreras.com, July 27, 2017, https://bretcontreras.com/science-is-self-correcting-the-case-of-the-hip-thrust-and-its-effects-on-speed/

[12] Cressey, E., 2017, In defense of the hip thrust, ericcressey.com, September 13, 2017, https://ericcressey.com/in-defense-of-the-hip-thrust