The member longevity provides time to digest what’s been discussed here over the years and as you must know, there is a massive database of information specific to what’s been discussed by many high level coaches over the years. By the way, are you a coach?
Make no mistake, however, I am no proponent of gerontocracy, none what so ever in fact. Clearly you are a smart fellow; however, that is different from possessing knowledge of certain subject matter- particularly that which forms the basis of this argument.
My mistake misreading your 5 stride comment. I thought I read 5 hurdle. Thus, I was referencing the little difference between a 5 hurdle drills versus the 10 and no different then a 30m acceleration vs a 100m sprint, the 30m acceleration is an actual component of the 100m sprint, same as the 5 hurdle drill (1st five for example) is the same as the 1st 5 of the race. So nothing wrong about it.
As for the javelin, you are creating variables to debate when none need be created. Clearly the "power outputs, horizontal velocities etc… " are all specific components of the throw with full approach.
The point, is that for the standing throw, regardless if it’s the javelin, shot, or disc, to be utilized as a specialized developmental activity (which by definition matches the biodynamic/biomotor/bioenergetic structure of any isolated component of the competition exercise) the kinematic and neuromuscular nature of the standing throw must match, as closely as possible, those attributes as they exist in the full approach.
Think of watching super slow motion of a throw with full approach and then editing the video down to the final segment in which the foot is planted and ends with the release of the javelin. That final segment is what must be practiced, as closely as possible, in a standing throw in order that the standing throw be a specialized developmental movement.So it’s all a matter of method of execution.
So we can clean that piece up by calling the version of the standing throw, that I’m discussing in a specialized context, something else if that helps you.
As for me not knowing what I’m talking about, a bold statement. How bout we let the readers decide for themselves.
It is insufficient to make a black and white argument (such as specific or general) as there is a huge grey area depending upon biodynamic, biomotor, and bioenergetic closeness.
It appears you have been through some more standardized coaching education as what I am writing about is often missed in those curricula. Hence why my profession involves coaching coaches. What is your profession?
When you state that your examples include very technical elements and are therefore classified as specific it is important to understand that specificity increases the more the biomotor/biodynamic/bioenergetic structure is matched.
Yes, the degree of SSC and stretch reflex in a standing throw are distant from the throw with full approach, again, the point is that if the standing throw is to serve a specialized role then the execution of it must be specialized (not just as part of a warm up to get the body prepared).
Clearly, the reason why a standing throw (executed via specialized kinematic/neuromuscular nature) won’t travel as far is because there is no approach velocity going into it; however, that does not disqualify the possibility of a specialized nature.
It seems you are not familiar with the work of Bondarchuk or Verkhoshansky, otherwise I wouldn’t need to explain this.
So to assist you in this particular subject matter:
Competition exercise is self-explanatory
specialized developmental (think biomotor/biodynamic/bioenergetic structure of some component of the competition exercise)
specialized preparatory (think biomotor and bioenergetic, however, biodynamics need not be specified)
the rest is general
Consider the principle of dynamic correspondence, which I mentioned previously, and use this criteria for determining the actual specificity of a movement relative to the nature of these factors relative to the competition exercise:
amplitude and direction of movement
accentuated region of force production
dynamics of effort
rate and time of maximal force force production
regime of muscular work
As for reading a post properly in order to comment- I agree and that goes both ways Wermouth so please practice what you preach.
You raise a very important point here Ollie. Well stated. This is case in point the mechanism behind many coaching illusions in general in which case perceptions are skewed based solely on results. When, as we know, when all is analyzed, many times we find just becomes some aspect of training is part of a greater whole that rendered results the aggregate of contributing factors provides the opportunity for more than one to not only be useless but even damaging.
As a coach and consultant I have seen this time and time again at the very “highest” levels of sport.
I strongly advise you to re read my previous statement (below)
which was made from biomechanical stand point of view.
When the action of the movement is corresponding with the form/shape of the event or element of the event even thou the speed of execution is far from execution at full speed those acctions/ movements are SPECIFIC! Due to technical nature of the action/movement.
As for Verkhoshansky, who wrote about special exercises,
"Solving the motor task of complex motor action accomplishes, through appropriate motor patterns, the sequence of moments that range in space and time”
If you haven’t read or heard his approach is also based around biomechanical/technical development as a priority.
It appears that I went through some standard coaching programme, well, let me think:
Just before I was able to take part in coaching programme had to go through subjects at uni which made me eligible to be a coach (just some subjects below) anathomy, anthropology, athletics, biology, biomechanics, biochemistry, methodology, pedagogy psychology, physiology, theory of sport and training (where we were fed with knowledge from brains such as: Zatsiorski, Matveyev, Bompa, Pavlov, Verkhoshansky, Drabik, Raczek or Sozański, etc…) and quite several other subjects, I had to complete them and pass with the exam.
Then after that had an over 300 hours+ (2years of studding at uni) of sessions of theory and practice to be a coach even thou I had an Athletics as a subject for three years. Finally I have obtained my qualifications, due to length of the course and intensity I guess for that reason on my diploma is mark/stamp from ministry of education and then did my masters and funny enough the topic of my thiesies was/is Influence of special fitness and it’s elements on the results of high profile jumpers.
So to answer your question or rather poor assumption, yes. Yes I went through standardised course, because where I am from this is what the standard coaching course looks like.
I can only assume that this what you know as a standard coaching course.
I just point out your previous statement “The key to ensuring specificity requires satisfying a battery of criteria, again such as Dynamic correspondence, in which all variables associated with the competition action are achieved” in both elements/drill SPEED/ POWER is missing which by your definition doesn’t meet the criteria of “all variables” however I am happy for you, that you learned something and classified those as a specific. Lol. Took long time. Don’t worry, we are nearly there.
Re: Bondarchuk do you have any own thoughts or just copy and paste without deeper understanding of actual model (Advanced Training for High Level Sports: The Transfer of Training)
You have to understand that every author providing slightly different point of view about given aspect of training therfore I am encouraging you to do further readings and studies if possible.
Maybe you should read Sozański, Raczek and Zatsiorski work than we can further discuss what is specific what’s not.
Also you are talking about “huge grey area”, what’s a bunch of nonsense taking into account that you have mentioned fine names in your posts such as Issurin Bondarchuk or Verkhoshansky. The whole subject of theory for sport it was based about identification of elements and naming them (terminology) so the people who actually are communicating with each other about specific sport/topic could understand each by using adequate/suitable terms. Authors above and others they made sure that grey areas doesn’t exist, sorry huge grey area. Unless you don’t understand the terms which might the situation in current circumstances.
If you have huge grey area it’s the right time to ask. Lol.
Not that I know everything but basics are there or maybe member of this forum will help for sure and if that fail I’ll be more then happy to refer you to suitable people so the could help you out with identification of the grey area, sorry, huge grey area.
Ok Wermouth, while your library consists of works by fantastic (and surely not conventional) authors. However, like it is in so many cases in my consulting experience, it’s one thing for an individual to have the information and another for them to fully understand it.
So while your education looks to be more comprehensive than I would have guessed, the limiting factor here clearly isn’t your education- it is either your understanding of the material, or possibly a language issue, and I’m glad to help either way.
Due to grammatical errors in most of your posts I’m guessing that English isn’t your first language. If I’m correct, then I first want to say how impressive it is that you are having this exchange with me in English. Truly, very impressive. I’m jealous in fact because if you’re Eastern European or Russian I must admit my passion for slavik languages.
Ok, what’s important for you to understand is that the continuum which I spoke of represents the range of movement transfer. I believe you understand this, however, I’ll explain for the readers: On one end you have general means which pose no ability to directly transfer to the competition event. On the other, you have the most specific means which start with the actual competition event. Hence the huge grey area between General and Specific. Perhaps me using the grey area term may have irritated you because of a language issue.
It’s not that this wide area of movement possibilities is unknown (I think you’re associating my use of the word grey with unknown), its that it must, as you note, be classified for purposes of communication- hence Bondarchuk’s system. in this way, we must not incorrectly categorize movements as specific or general because the middle ground of specialized movements must be understood.
The more you understand about biomechanics and physiology the more you know how the competition exercise and associated movements may be manipulated in their method of execution in order to satisfy none (general), some (specialized), or all (specialized/competition) of the kinematic and neuromuscular attributes of the competition exercise.
So, to use Bondarchuk’s terms (because he developed so many World and Olympic Champions), the spectrum of specialized developmental and specialized preparatory options for many different sporting actions is large- particularly specialized preparatory actions as the biomechanics need not be matched.
So when I described how a javelin throw from a standing position must be performed a particular way in order that it be classified as specialized, I’m a licensed to do so because some, not all, of the criteria are satisfied if the method of execution secures the geometric position of the final position and the neuromuscular efforts are maximized.
So again, my guess is that the biggest issue here is you not speaking English as your first language- which again, if I’m correct, I applaud you for being able to discuss these matters in English.
Well you have put me in very difficult situation, I don’t know whether to thank you for your kind words or to tell you to F.O. Lol.
I hate it when people assume or say that we cannot have a detailed conversation because I apparently have a problem with understanding due to the fact that English isn’t my first language, maybe they have an issue with keeping up or maybe just for a sake of being malicious.
I don’t have much time to consistently correct my grammar, most of the time posts are typed on the mobile so I can’t be correcting constantly especially on the go!
However if you have a problem with understanding I’ll be more then happy to make necessary corrections to help you understand.
First of all I do understand as to why you have stated in your post that Bondarchuk as a leading brain. Having said that he is not the only one providing definitions, categorisation etc… of what is specific… what’s not…
Furthermore, from previous posts whether was the run up the hill or javelin throw from standing position or hurdles you have tendency to use term neuromuscular stimulation, which by what you have written indicates as a high enough effort, so the given activity is within the closest possible competitive speed/ power re execution.
I don’t think that this is necessary to obtain the desired outcome and at the same time be specific.
Secondly you have mentioned physiology. To support what I have written before with my limited knowledge I’ll try to explain you as to why you don’t need high efforts to improve biomechanical qualities or as you might prefer to call it ergonomics of the event from physiological point of view.
From neuro studies (electro-microns level) nerve is surrounded with myelin, myelin has small gaps called nodes of ranvier, also small organelles are attached to myelin to strengthen the structure called oligodendroytes.
When impulse is sent, nerve vibrates and consequently leaking cytoplasmic fluid (I think it’s called cytostol).
Fluid attaches itself to myelin and oligodendroytes. More the nerve vibrates then more fluid leaks, the more fluid leaks then more is attached, that process creates superconductor.
I believe that I don’t have to explain as to why creating the right neuropathways is desirable. So, knowing the above facts, has left nothing more as to add quote form the man “Practice doesn’t make perfect. Practice makes permanent. Only perfect practice will make perfect”
Whether it’s done with walking speed or sub max it needs to be done right.
Therefore with all the above there is strong evidence that neuromuscular/ biomechanical changes can be done even with walking speed as long as they’re done right.
We are making progress Wermouth and it certainly seems as if terms/language was much of the issue for our initial disagreements.
No doubt that Bondarchuk is only one of many knowledgeable specialists. Here are the list of authors I have recommended to coaches over the years: Abadjiev, Ivan, Drabik, Josef, Dvorkin, L.S., Francis, Charlie, Hartmann, Jurgan, Homenkova, L.S., Issurin, Vladimir, Komi, Paavo, Kurz, Thomas, Laputin, N.P., Medvedyev, Alexei, Mozzhukhin, A.S., Nurmekivi, Ants,Oleshko, V.G., Ozolin, N, Pfaff, D, Popov, V, Ritzdorf, Wolfgang, Roman, Robert, Schexnayder, Boo, Schmidtbleicher, Dietmar, Schmolinsky, Gerhardt, Seluyanov, V.N., Smith, John, Solodkov, A, Sozanski, Henryk, Starzynski, Tadeusz, Tidow, Guntor, Tihanyi, Jozef, Tunnemann, Harold, Verkhoshansky, Yuri, Viru, Atko, Zaitchouk, Boris, Zatsiorsky, Vladimir, Zhelyaskov, Tsvetan
Further, you will appreciate that the late Yuri Verkhoshansky communicated to me that he felt I was the westerner who both- most effectively understood his methods and was a competent writer- so he paid me to edit the English text for Special Strength Training-2nd Edition, Resistance Exercises as a Specialized Means for Physical Preparation for Athletes, The Block Training System in Endurance Running, and the Training System in Middle Distance Running, and Vladimir Issurin has collected information of mine to publish in an article of his on Block Periodization.
As for the nerve physiology you’ve referenced, good material and no argument. In addition, what must be recognized is not only the micro level of the nerve activity but activity at the motor-unit level. In this way, we understand that the neuromuscular intensity of movement influences the escalation from recruitment, to rate coding, to synchronization. Therefore, it is only at requisite intensities in which the motor pathway is crystalized. From this, while neuromuscular and biochemical changes occur at even the low neuromuscular outputs- the neuromuscular coordination required to negotiate both muscle contractile velocities and overall movement/limb velocities in various high velocity sport actions simply cannot be effectively/significantly influenced by preparatory movements that are outside a certain window of proximity to the event specific velocities.
The interesting thing is that the margin of proximity to the event specific characteristics narrows as outputs rise. For this reason, the margin of effectiveness/transfer is much wider the lower the output level of the athletes and narrows, substantially, as outputs rise.
What is your native language? By the way, I was not criticizing your English language skills, I was commending you on them.
Little bit from different angle.
First, can we define what coaching is?
Simple definition I know is “teaching while training” and if anyone disagree or got better one, than don’t just sit there, go ahead and share different idea.
James you have wrote before
“Hence why my profession involves coaching coaches”. So you do must have a basic idea about pedagogy and methodology and how to use specific methods, specific tools, specific approaches, adequate forms of assessments (formal, informal, etc…) specific exercises, etc… So that you’re able to reach desired outcome of training session and lesson but also meet the learning objective (LO) of lesson/training session.
Most of the time coaches talking about meeting training objectives in their macrocycle and/ yearly training objective eg. taking part in champs, wining medal or achieve qualifying standard, whatever.
Not many actually are talking about LO for their unit, micro, meso, macrocycle, training year etc…
So we are talking about hill+sled.
Hypothetical situation:
Coach X, he/she believes that low foot recovery will contribute to athletes better acceleration consequently better time.
So the LO for the given unit/session crated by coach x could be: To be aware of foot placement/movement during recovery cycle/phase.
Training on the hill with sled might gives the coach x opportunity to actually slows the athlete just enough due to added resistance for the athlete to have the right alignments but also create circumstances where the learning objective for the given session is actually met.
So coach x hypothetically can do whatever, let say 2/3x5x5m before other training elements are added.
I can see some readers going red while reading “slowing the athlete” are you mad?, what about ground contact, fibre recruitment, what about this or that, bla bla bla. Remember about the LO for the session low foot recovery (end of September 2015) and coach x at that given moment doesn’t care about the ground contacts what he/she cares about is whether the athlete learned how to recover his/her foot efficiently, however coach x keeps in the mind his/her yearly learning and training objectives which he/she will try to meet on the 16/17 July 2016.
So, would this hypothetical approach with hypothetical length of 3/4 weeks with hypothetical frequency of 1/2times a week running with sled on the hill over hypothetical distance 5m really affected us to the point when we are going backwards? (taking into account that there might be other elements in the training eg. hurdle hops where the missing stimulus would come from)
And above all.
Would that particular exercise develop the desire effect? (low foot recovery)
Would the learning objective be met?
Finally.
As a consequence of meeting the learning objective in very early stages of yearly training cycle, could the athlete benefit from it during comp on the 16/17 July 2016? (10 months away)
Wermouth, to answer your question regarding pedagogy, methodology, specifics, and so on- yes. All of the above.
The “red flag” that comes up me, for the same reasons as my initial posts in this thread, for your given hypothetical coach using the hill/sled, at low volumes, for the low heel recovery LO is that the hill alone, depending on slope, has the potential to teach this. In addition, the sled alone, given the appropriate load, also has the potential to teach this. Lastly, attaching a strap secured to low resistance, or an elastic band, to the ankle will have the biggest direct impact on limiting heel recovery due to the resistance being attached distally on the lever. Justin Gatlin has actually been shown to use an elastic contraption (maybe the vertimax); however, I’m not sure what role it plays in his overall training.
Again, though, if I were forced to have an athlete use a sled on a hill such as you have described I would certainly place it at the beginning of a GPP for the reasons I’ve previously explained.
Ironically, I had an athlete I prepared for an NFL combine a few years ago who was convinced that this elastic contraption he used was making him faster. In actuality, it forced him to run with low heel recovery throughout the entire duration of whatever distance he ran as well as maintain an elbow angle that was too open. I worked very hard to convince him this was a bad idea and eventually got him to drastically limit his use of the device. Low heel recovery during block/start clearance is certainly a mechanical advantage, however, as well all know- not at 10, 20, 30meters and beyond.
Yet again you are leaning towards effort instead of quality of the repetition. Lower intensity is required in the first place to create appropriate neuromuscular responses eg. there is a reason as to why A skip need to be done correctly prior to running, unless you are doing it for sake of doing it. Also rate coding, synchronisation, improving motorskills, creating new neurological networks synaptic growth and plasticity occurring while we are recovering, especially during REM sleep. So you have to make sure that the quality of the repetition from biomechanical point of view is as high as possible.
Crystalized, ey?
Crystallisation is the proces of growing protein in the lab so they can be examined in 3D.
Finally learned something about lower intensities.
Let’s talk about influence.
They can be influenced at much lower intensities than you assume.
Little bit from different angle. There is one field which came to my mind. (create different angle with hope that will help you with better understanding) where skills and high technical elements are required and being practised at very low speed to achieve highest possible mastery. When neuromuscular pattern (technique) is in place, than it’s being transferred into speed/fast execution. Musicians (talking pro) Many wants to play caprice 24, not that many actually can. I know music is not too close to the sport however Mr Paganini and Mr Bondarchuk know that technical mastery is the key to success.
Really that’s interesting, why don’t you go to the track in the future, take a hammer and try to throw it with maximum output and then slow it down. Than comeback and share the foundings, which execution had a wider proximity margin.
Looks like you have basic understanding of biomechanics so you should know that every lever got its own center of balance/gravity. Straps at the ankle, ey. Hope you are not teaching any javelin thrower to throw while holding at the tip, it’s pretty similar effect to your straps idea. lol.
Hypothetically coach x wanted to have a period of adaptation 4 weeks, before changing stimulus. Therefore sled was added at the further stages of GPP.
Now tell me if that hypothetical approach would not work?
Wermouth, I understand that you underwent comprehensive undergraduate and graduate schooling, however, it is important for you to understand that I have lectured on more than one occasion to post-graduate students, such as yourself, and their professors, none of whom are coaches, and much of what you share here, regardless of research findings on athlete populations that have not been specified by you, is unseen at the highest levels of sport in terms of the varied methodological strategies used by the highest level athletes.
This is why, for example, there are many sprinters who perform drills with mechanical precision, such as A skips, yet are unable to optimize the mechanics of actual sprinting.
While it is paramount that the neuromuscular intensity must not exceed mechanical efficiency (I’ve lectured on this numerous times in fact), it is important for you to understand that, particularly regarding high level athletes, it’s one thing to perform a training drill well and another to optimize the technical execution of the competition activity. This is the premise for specialized exercises which preserve much more competition structure than more non-specific actions.
Another language issue. I use the term crystalize not in the clinical sense, but as a synonym for formalize/solidify/galvanize…
I’m a music school graduate in actuality (Berklee College of Music) and there is merit to what you are writing; however, again, in order to assist you in the real world of elite level sport performance enhancement on high level athletes, their are limits to the transfer and more importantly, the performance level of the athletes must be specified. For example, there is a reason why novice weightlifters perform high volumes of movement preparation with wooden sticks and unloaded barbells. And the reason is based in the nerve physiology data you’ve previously referenced. However, as mastery rises (MS, CMS…) the preparatory measures taken that yield the highest transfer to competition performance must occur at higher intensities which is why “technique” training occurs at much higher intensities than compared to the novice stages.
Zaitchouk, Bondarchuk, Verkhoshansky, and numerous others have expounded upon the very narrow margin of specific adaptation. Zaitchouk, talks of the weak radiation process in the brain resultant of low intensity training. This unlocks excitation in the CNS and is therefore useful at the beginning of practices or for recuperation when the CNS is stressed. He makes clear, however, that in order to reach the highest results possible it is necessary to systematically train with maximum intensity. This is the theme we see shared amongst the worlds elite regardless if it is the throws, the sprints, jumps…
So it’s not that you are wrong with your argument, it’s that much of your argument points are only appropriate for less than elite level athletes who certainly require more training load volume of various movements performed a low neuromuscular outputs in order to secure the motor pathways. Now, the exception lies in higher level athletes who are operating in spite of gross mechanical flaws or coming back from an injury. In instances such as these, yes, movement must be slowed and optimized before it may be intensified; however, the nature of the movement itself must still be of a specialized character relative to the competition structure.
Again, I think this is a language issue. The wider margin for preparatory effectiveness on competition results lies exclusively with lower level athletes. The reason lies in adaptive capability and how a wide variety of stimuli are effective for bolstering event specific adaptation. Alternatively, as the athlete’s output rises, along with the mechanical optimization of event technique at high intensities, the margin for preparatory effectiveness narrows substantially and much more training precision is required to further competition results- hence the paradox “the better you get, the harder it is to get better”.
Wermouth, seems I’m going to have to assist you with your biomechanics understanding and I am glad to do so. Sprinting is a closed kinetic chain activity in which the primary force producing levers (legs) are exerting against an immovable object (the track). The implications therein are related to the discussion of heel recovery and how low heel recovery is a mechanical advantage (shortening the distance/path through space in which the foot travels thereby being able to deliver force sooner) during the early stage of acceleration and the predominance of horizontal forces due to the sprinter overcoming static inertia out of the blocks.
And the fact remains that when the distal link of the limb (ankle) is the attachment point for resistance in the opposition direction of the line of travel, it forces the limb to lengthen during the recovery cycle and low heel recovery is assured, however, with minimal structural stress incurred by the distal link (the stress is greater at the hip flexor, however).
Now, even though you were joking, the javelin analogy you made is not accurate. The characteristics of the throwing arm are an open kinetic chain action in which the name of the game is optimizing the impulse transmission from the lower extremities to the trunk to the javelin via the throwing arm amidst an incredible braking action via the leg brace. Unlike the premise for a sprinter using resistance attached to the ankle to foster low heel recovery during initial acceleration. In this case, the length of the lever, and the lever center of balance, is increased due to the pull of resistance.
While a javelin thrower is seeking to optimize the velocity of the elbow during the actual throw (as this has the closest correlation to the release velocity) and holding a javelin at the tip is an entirely different biomechanical circumstance than a strap being attached to the ankle of a sprinter. Holding the javelin at the tip would drastically increase the pressure on the arm/wrist via greatly increasing the length of the lever of the javelin, shifting the center of balance of the lever at a substantial cost. This would not be an efficient means of increasing the velocity of the elbow and the lever arm of the throwers throwing arm naturally lengthens during the throw so again, not a good analogy with respect to ankle attachment for the sprinter.
I perform skype/facetime consults for coaches all the time. I realize you’re not a coach, however, you might consider one as it is clear I could assist you with some of the confusion you have and what I suspect is more of your experience working with junior athletes and very little with elite athletes.
As for the hypothetical sled being added at the further stages of GPP, again, not optimal, but not because it cannot work. I believe the hypothetical coach is working with junior athletes and for that reason alone the coach is afforded a wider margin for effectiveness with a host of preparatory strategies which is a luxury not afforded to the world’s elite. Just because a hypothetical activity yields results in juniors doesn’t mean it was the most optimal hypothetical solution.
Finally James.
Yes, might take you a bit further and quicker in life.
This is what you have wrote before.
I like when you actually make suitable to yourself corrections to what you’ve written before. “along with the mechanical optimization of event technique” lol.
To create an extra pseudo support and change actually context for the point you have incorrectly made before.
I like it thou, the fact that you are recognising you own mistakes and changing them might be considered as a progress.
Enough said.
You could easily used words such as: brace, stiffen, toughen, support, but I guess they are just not sophisticated enough so you might sound too ordinary. Instead you sound…
Have you ever been diagnosed with split personality disorder?
I have an impression that I am having conversation with two people.
(that’s not a joke)
Period.
I believe to find the true and proper answer one would take into account the way the chinese marshal arts teachers passed on their knowledge.
It is known that 1% of the information was witheld from the student by each and every teacher.
If one of the students who has been given access to 100% in anyway shares the information they will be no more.
So the Bruce Lee legend goes.
Everything has a purpose, find how the sled and hill combined can benefit speed. To simply say it works or doesn’t work would be guess.
Two groups with and without added resistance, all the data, gotto add some more letters to someones name.
The story goes
Bachelor of bullshit, master of bullshit, piled higher and deeper and so it goes on.
I agree.
Most of exercises, periodisation, approaches work. Period
It’s up the coach to decide what he/she feels comfortable with and when/how to use it.