In yesterday’s post, I outlined a very small part of one particular template I use with some athletes. The goal is, quite simply to get athletes stronger. It does not, however, necessarily mean the implicit goal is to improve their squat, bench, deadlift, or any other specific lift. Hang with me here.
The goal of auxiliary training for non-iron athletes (powerlifters and weightlifters) is merely to improve sport results. Many times, this will include the use of common barbell exercises, such as squats, bench press, deadlifts, and the Olympic lifts and their variations, just to name a few. These exercises, and their method of execution, are “tools of the trade” so to speak – they are not the final product. Unfortunately, the mistake many coaches make is simply looking for the numbers in specific lifts to go up.
For demonstration’s sake, let’s use the squat. The motor ability is strength in the muscles of the legs and hips as well as General Organism Strength – the overall output capability of the nervous system; the skill is the squat (whichever variation is being tested). In some ways, the two cannot be separated – there’s going to be a fairly strong correlation. However, if I had an athlete only use the leg press to build up leg strength, and another (of comparable morphology, physiology, training history, etc.) build up leg strength via the squat, the second athlete would undoubtedly perform better on a squat test. Not necessarily because they are “stronger,” but because in addition to building up strength, they have been practicing the skill of squatting.
Note that I’m not saying this is a good or bad thing; simply realize that the final number we see is due to a confluence of factors, and even more importantly, it’s not necessarily vital to sporting outcome. In other words, revisiting the previous example, let’s say athlete 1 squatted 315, and athlete 2 squatted 365. We automatically assume athlete 2 is “stronger” and will perform better, right? Unfortunately, no. Obviously this will also depend on the sport in question, but the fact is, both athletes may be comparable in “strength” (because athlete 1 was still leg pressing), but this says nothing of other motor abilities such as speed, reactive-elastic ability, flexibility/mobility, or more importantly sport skill.
This also underscores the point that we may use a variety of exercises to accomplish goals. However, the idea of constant exercise rotation has a few drawbacks as well (which I mentioned a bit in a previous post).
1. Motor learning – a new exercise will have a learning curve, meaning that it cannot be loaded the same as an exercise that has been practiced frequently. While load is certainly not everything, it does have its benefits.
2. Soreness – with a new exercise will often come muscular soreness (the amount and duration depending on a number of things). This soreness, or what Charlie Francis termed “adaptation stiffness,” will cost training time, because the ensuing training (sport-specific and otherwise), will be hindered.
3. Time to learn – this one may not be a huge issue, though it certainly can be. If an athlete knows how the squat/hinge/press/pull patterns well, then moving from one variation to another should not take much teaching time. However, there may be nuances which require more time to teach and integrate, which again, takes up valuable training time. Because time is the one variable that everyone has an equal amount of, it is prudent (in my opinion) not to waste it on variables that may make little to no difference. As I’ve outlined in a previous post, exercises are but one variable that can be manipulated to induce the desired training effect.
The take home is this – yes, there are skills which transfer well to the field/court/pool, but don’t get so caught up in the athlete’s ability to excel (or not) at these skills – it’s the end result, their performance, which is the final arbiter of success. Understand that a 10 pound jump in the bench press might just be because they got better at bench pressing, not because they actually improved their ability to produce force. Differentiate between the goal and the tools used to achieve it.
