Thinking outside the barrel

thirtyfoot

http://www.overspeed.org/

This is a website of an ice hockey coach in the States. Although it is hockey based, its very good and relevant to anyone interested in the practical development of speed and conditioning of team sports or any sports for that matter. The quote "thinking outside the barrel" comes from his idea that ice hockey isn't played in a barrel so why do exercises in a barrel, eg, the conventional squat. I'm a big fan of anything that questions why you do something and only doing something that you believe is relevant to your sport and not because your coach or your coach's coach passed it on down the line.

justsomebloke

I have to say I have never done a conventional squat in a barrel, maybe I should start, but anybody know of any benefits to doing them in a barrel

Hanley

Maybe they should try squatting on ice skates if they want "sports specific".

I was always under the impression that the skill of the sport is learnt by playing and coaching, whereas strength is built lifting heavy things...

Dragan

Hanley wrote:

I was always under the impression that the skill of the sport is learnt by playing and coaching, whereas strength is built lifting heavy things...

Exactly. When I think of "sports specific" I think of lifts that would be specifically beneficial to that sport. Some lifts cross all lines and boundries and are pretty much beneficial to everything.

It strikes me sometimes that people need to be appearing to be different to be heard.

Hanley

Dragan wrote:

.

It strikes me sometimes that people need to be appearing to be different to be heard.

*cough* That's the entire basis of the majority of articles on t-nation *cough*.

brianthebard

Hanley wrote:

*cough* That's the entire basis of the majority of articles on t-nation *cough*.

What you mean ribcage expansion may not actually be real???:eek:

Hanley

brianthebard wrote:

What you mean ribcage expansion may not actually be real???:eek:

Don't get me started on Elliginton Darden. He's like a bad re-incarnation of Arthur Jones.

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

I was always under the impression that the skill of the sport is learnt by playing and coaching, whereas strength is built lifting heavy things...

But surely there is no point lifting heavy things if it has no relevance to your sport. I'm a runner, and I've always done the conventional squat, every coach I've had has told me to do a conventional squat, yet when I'm running both my feet are never on the ground at the same time. I can't see how when doing a squat I'm working the muscle I am when running. A one legged squat is probably more relevant. I know the guys in UL created a squat machine that was specific to the start of a sprint but I have never used it or seen it.

I don't think Jack Blatherwick has to appear to be different to be heard. He has been listened to in ice hockey circles in the US for the past 20 years at various NHL teams and is a former US Olympic Strength & Conditioning Coach. His articles are simple and straightforward. I mighn't agree with all he says but I think its good he challenges what might be regarded as conventional training techniques.

Dragan

Tingle wrote:

But surely there is no point lifting heavy things if it has no relevance to your sport. I'm a runner, and I've always done the conventional squat, every coach I've had has told me to do a conventional squat, yet when I'm running both my feet are never on the ground at the same time. I can't see how when doing a squat I'm working the muscle I am when running. A one legged squat is probably more relevant. I know the guys in UL created a squat machine that was specific to the start of a sprint but I have never used it or seen it.

A one legged squat will work the same muscles as a normal squat, just in different ways and with different stresses. This is, by and large, what all excercises variants do.

Also, if your a sprinter than i hope you do Oly lifts?

Hanley

So basically you're saying being strong isn't important to running? I'm assuming you mean sprinting? Cos if it's long distance then obviously it isn;t important.

I know for a fact that the vast majority of top English spinters squat. And some of them squat damn heavy. 500lbs and then some.

I don't know if you've ever played ice hockey, but being strong is a massive advantage. Not only does it give improved acceleration, but it also makes you harder to rough up. I would imagine that it also gives you a more powerful shot, once your technique is good of course. And lets not forget the injury prevention aspect too.

Basically, is heavy training needed for long distance sports? Probably not.
Is heavy training needed for stop/start sports that require alot of power? Yes.

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

So basically you're saying being strong isn't important to running? I'm assuming you mean sprinting? Cos if it's long distance then obviously it isn;t important.

I know for a fact that the vast majority of top English spinters squat. And some of them squat damn heavy. 500lbs and then some.

I don't know if you've ever played ice hockey, but being strong is a massive advantage. Not only does it give improved acceleration, but it also makes you harder to rough up. I would imagine that it also gives you a more powerful shot, once your technique is good of course. And lets not forget the injury prevention aspect too.

Basically, is heavy training needed for long distance sports? Probably not.
Is heavy training needed for stop/start sports that require alot of power? Yes.

I totally agree with all you've said, I'm not saying I don't do strength work or that being strong is not important to running but I'm questioning the specific relevance of the strength work I'm doing (or would have done as a sprinter). Previously a long sprinter (200-400m etc), I'm now middle distance (800-1500m) and do mainly core work and plyos. I feel stronger on the track and (touch wood) injury free since I've moved away from lifting weights(with good form). Maybe a coincidence but maybe not, but its the only thing I've changed. Having said that if I was still sprinting I'd still be doing the olympic lifts.

Of course the english sprinters do squats, most do, but the great Michael Johnson did very little squat work, preferring the lunge. Who's wrong, who's right? Seb Coe did savage work in the gym, lifting etc, while Wilson Kipketer probably never set foot inside one, yet both ran very similar times and held world records at the same event. Blatherwick's theories work, as does the coach down the road who contradicts him, its what finding whats best for you.

Hanley

Valid points... I also agree with you!

Everyone has a better and more effective system eh?

I think the important thing is giving yourself 100% to whatever style or system you follow. Only them can it be accurately evaluated. I know that for me, I'm faster than I've ever been, and routinely (well every summer and winter) outsprint soccer players I know who are over in america on scholarships, and I haven't done any sprinting or running in about 18 months. As I get stronger, I get faster.

Of course this is only over 60ish meters.

I would imagine coniditioning as opposed to absolute strength is more important once you leave the 100/200m distances. I once heard someone refer to the 400 as a sprinters marathon!

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

I think the important thing is giving yourself 100% to whatever style or system you follow. Only them can it be accurately evaluated.

Thats the thing, I'm not sure where I'm at, still evaluating even though I'm getting older and running out of time! I've always followed a conventional programme, but I still think its good to always ask why am I doing this or that. The same applies to my running. For middle distance, I've always gone for speed over miles, but recently the heavy miles school of thought has been interesting me. Anyway, I'm off to the pub, happy in the knowledge that I got my miles on the clock in my lunchtime run and putting to the back of my mind that I'll have to struggle through a speed track session tomorrow hungover to hell!