I understood,and respect what you said,nor I am ridiculing your words in any way.
As long as words are concerned,well,words may be inappropriate,the general sense surely is not.
Well,if you have access to Italian and English media,then,just have a comprehensive look for latest articles and interviews by doctors,trainers,and phdâs in different areas re: injuries in pro soccer this season.
Some claims made on this forum too are quite anti-scientific ,some to the point of being difficult to logically sustain as well,by the way. As #2 says,we all have some responsibilities in this regard,some in communication,some in attitudes and true ends I guess.
As we get deeper into the discussion, I think we agree much more than we disagree.
Now that specific age ranges and developmental levels are being addressed I think we are very much in agreement.
My interest in talent identification only applies to doing so when the time is right, which differs based upon sport structure and biological maturity rates, in order to subvert mistakenly premature exclusion/misdirection.
I agree bold!
And sometimes getting the desired response becomes a trial and error process,as the desired response may vary ,being itself a mean to an end.
In my collaboration with Dr Verkhoshansky on his upcoming 2nd Coaches Manual, prior to his death, we decided to replace the word plyometric with the proper term- reactive-elastic.
Pliometric, with an I, indicated, from Greek, increased measurement. No reference to speed. Thus, pliometric is the proper term to describe what is currently referred to as eccentric.
Plyometric, with a Y, was termed by Fred Wilt who was a friend of and had visited Dr Verkhoshansky and, with respect to Wilt, the word and use of plyometric has really muddled the sport training literature.
In the 2nd coaches manual it is also explained that concentric and eccentric are misused words in reference to sport science/muscle physiology.
So, those of you who purchase the 2nd manual, when it comes out, will see the following vernacular:
concentric is replaced by miometric, or overcoming
eccentric is replaced by pliometric, or yielding
isometric remains the same and is equivalent to sustaining and static
plyometric is replaced by reactive/elastic
and shock is exclusive to the most intensive forms of rapid muscle lengthening
Other than smooth shifts one way or the other allowed for by the training process fine tuning the whole CFTS aims to, how do you manage to effectively separate the effects of plyometrics - as well as of any other training mean - from central to peripheral?
As you may know regardless of the athlete,regardless of the sport,regardless of the end goal,all of my training has been based on stimuli eliciting as pure and controlled as possible reflexive activity,which to me allows for both central and peripheral adaptation to the highest degree and at the fastest rate,hence implying the highest and fastest potential of change,with precisely this being one of the goals of adopting such extreme methodological choices.
The avatar is a charcol by jolliffe. If you believe the genetic thing he has the verandah over the eyes and it more than likely continues around the whole head.
Not speaking for No2, but for myself, the use of reactive/elastic means for either central or peripheral stimuli and subsequent adaptive response is managed via intensive or extensive methods of execution, respectively.
Do you mean, by adding a dumbbell or mediball to the Plyro movement?
In which case, i would not - itâs increasing ground contact time. Unless your goal is for the initial Starting mechanics - ie, a squat throw into a dive. Then a mediball is ideal.
I would agree.
Its like CF said about Sprinting - 1 x 200m done in 19.xx is much more taxing on the CNS than 10 x 200âs done in 25sec. - where as 10 x 200âs done in 30sec would be largely PNS and not very taxing on the CNS.
The same principle holds true for reactive work/plyros
It was a general question, personally i do not believe in mixing weights and plyos. i start with boxes and have two assisting, one either side holding under elbow. the thread is started under strength training, i know a few who use 10+kg weight vests for their plyo work and some are highly accredited coaches.
Charlie and I had the chance opportunity to sit down with a former WC 100m runner (and her coach) quite a few years ago. She told us how she would run (as speed work) 10 x 100m at 11.1 seconds (hand times) with a walk back for recovery. While we were impressed with her stamina, we were not convinced these workouts were enough to create an adaptive response for maximum velocity (i.e. max v at 10.8 seconds for 100m FAT). Her weightlifting consisted of circuit-type weights, so they were not used as a central stimulus. But she told us she would do a total 500 jumps per workout.
Because the volume of jumps was so high, there wasnât a specific peripheral conversion to max velocity (assuming ground contact times were much higher than 0.090 sec required at max v). However, that volume of jumps could create a general high-intensity âcentralâ stimulus that would create a positive nervous system adaptation that could be transferred to her alactic abilities.
Thus, we reasoned that plyos (or jumps) have a plasticity that allows you to apply them for specific training for ground contact and reactive work, use them as a general loading mechanism for providing a CNS stimulus to be transfered and applied in another manner (high volume, high intensity), or be used as a general strength workout in a peripheral manner (i.e. high volumes, slightly lower intensity).
If your weight program doesnât have a high intensity quality to it, I believe the jumps/plyos have to take a different form to make up for the lack of intensity in the weight program. The plyos are providing a general CNS stimulus that can take the place of the weight program, and may be more complimentary for a sprinter. Perhaps this is why there are numerous cases of long jumpers converting to world class 100m sprinters later in their career (i.e. Bruny Surin, Leroy Burrell, Kareem Street-Thompson), as well as Carl Lewis.
I have seen this plasticity of jump training applied with numerous athletes, particularly in winter training where outdoor weather and indoor facilities to do not allow for max velocity work, as well as a lack of sophistication with their weight programs.
Note I have been careful not to equate plyos with jump training. There is some overlap, but they are not exactly the same thing.
#2, I have seen the case of high volume jumps later having influence on alactic abilities. I used ut this summer and am trying to find out how to apply this work in better organized manner with speed and weight work.
