Technology and training
On Dec 3 2017 it was 25 years to the day since the first text message (SMS) was successfully sent. [1] [2] The message required a computer. They could be received on a hand set mobile phone, but could not be responded to.
Twenty five years ago athletes – pro and amateur – were trained on programs that were not individualized, using crude assumptions that what they were doing would make them better, and because they for the most part typically didn’t start the strength training seriously until they were in their late teens or early twenties, the injuries that occurred towards the end of the first decade of strength training were masked by ‘retirement age’.
Twenty-five years later, post 2017, technology is moving to messaging apps such as Facebook, whatsApp, etc. Texting continues, with 800 million a month in Australia on the Vodafone network alone. [3]
Twenty-five years later, post 2017, athletes – pro and amateur – are trained on programs that….are not individualized, using crude assumptions that what they were doing would make them better.
Nothings changed? Yes, there is a change! The starting age for athletes commencing serious strength training has dropped by a decade, which means that the typical injuries caused by strength training that appear within the first decade are appearing a decade before ‘retirement’ age – and are therefore no longer masked.
And this is a problem. Not so much for the coaches with a big talent pool, because there will be someone to take the place. But for the individual athletes, whose hopes and dreams are crushed – when this situation was both predictable and preventable….
Oh, I forgot to mention – if you are really lucky, your coach might change the name on top of your program sheet!
Does this absence of masking of injuries by retirement cause any changes in the way humans act or respond? Apparently not.
There are a few additional technological impacts on physical training.
Firstly, the surgery techniques to repair damaged connective tissue has really advanced, in that the surgeries are less invasive, and the healing time is shorter. Does this mean that surgery no longer comes with further collateral damage? I suggest not.
Secondly, technological advances in measuring training. GPS units to track movement patterns, forces platforms to measure power output, timing gates for displacement speeds etc.
And thirdly advancements in equipment, positively impacting performance.
But what about program design? Is that important? Obviously not important enough for the masses to expect advancement in the ability of ‘professionals’ to provide individualization in program design, because in this regard nothings changed.
Oh, and there is one more change worth noting – the increase in incidence and severity of injuries appears to be constantly rising…..
——-
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/first-text-message-sender-neil-papworth-celebrates-25th-sms-anniversary-11154491
[2] http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/03/worlds-first-text-message-sent-25-years-ago-today-7127957/
[3] https://www.vodafone.com.au/red-wire/text-message-25-years
Hi Ian,
I fully agree with you! I have a young client of just 21 in the Hockeyroos national team and a scholarship holder. She recently forwards me the training program they wanted her to undertake for a 6- 8 week period throughout the Xmas break. It was a generic program given to all the girls, nothing individual about it and the people giving the programs are considered the best in Western Australia, professionals and leaders in their field.
She has since fully ruptured her ACL and is now in rehab post surgery. I wasn’t there and I am not part of the internal team I am just an outsider she seeked out for treatment, so I cant make assumptions but I wonder if her injury was preventable?
From what she has told me in the past there doesn’t seem to be an holistic preparation from the basics up, and I thought at least at that level everything would be tailored to the individual. Everything should be tailored individually at any level as I have learnt from your brilliant publications etc.
I just thought I would share my observation.
What it does do is nail home to me even more that the KSI methods make so much common sense.
Rick
Thanks Rick for sharing your observations, and as you know, they are consistent with my observations. The current status quo, unchanged for decades, is that athletes (and general population) do not individualised training programs. Now we treat our motor cars with more individualisation in their servicing than we do athletes. There is little wonder the incidence and severity of injuries rise as the number of people exposed to this non-individualised training increases.
Preventable? Absolutely! I am not making a flippant statement when I say repeatedly and originally –
ALL INJURIES ARE PREDICTABLE AND PREVENTABLE
I appreciate also that just before this trend of non-individualisation turns for the better, there will be significant push back to defend those who chose not to embrace the need to individualise. So I always appreciate the supportive, aligned responses, before the how shall I say, less supportive ones!
Thanks for choosing to serve the world in a higher way than embracing generic programs!
Ian King