I am definitely interested.
There are also plans a foot for a seminar later this year in the UK if you are interested in traveling to the sun!
Will be during a soccer international break.
no23,
good points, but many clarifications are needed. What is the technology you are referring to? (you made some examples, but then I missed the point, my fault, probably).
If you don’t define that, we are talking for nothing. Omegawave? ARP? An algorithm for the analysis of data would be technology (it is)?
The main problem is with the interpretation of data, as you said, because it requires a framework. In absence of framework, we are in a similar cul de sac as that currently faced by scientists working on the interface genome/medicine. Lots, tons of data, but many problems in the interpreation.
Now, as I wrote before, we don’t still understand a lot of things (and we won’t for a lot time) and therefore the implementation of technology is not automatic. If, let’s say, such a reliable algorithm were available, its simple implementation for determining training loads, emphasis and so on would be straightforward. If a reliable and 100% effective “cure” for, let’s say, overtraining were there, its application would be as straigthforward as the application of Quinine for malaria.
Talking about expertise vs technology without a context is naive.
Said that, Charlie was a great expert.
I was being general on purpose.
To get into the exact details of each technology would take forever, so I was speaking about the application of technology - from simplest to most complex.
Take timing gates and speed technique as an example … how many people use them properly and adjust training properly as a result?
How many people test speed once or twice and it just tells them what they more or less know already?
To summarize …
A test or technology is only useful if it affects a training session.
(Now I’m talking about Team Sports just so we are on the same page.)
Also, you make the comparison of quinine and malaria, with overtraining - however we generally wish to prevent overtraining, and as we know prevention is much more complex and therefore there is no ‘plug & play’ option, rather a protocol and series of steps to prevent it.
This is what I mean by application of technology.
Your last line is very important too (if I read it correctly). But rather than looking at it as ‘expertise vs technology’ look at it as ‘expertise & technology’.
The greatest impact is when expertise and technology are integrated and the degree of impact (of a technology, or on the athlete) is dependent on the degree of expertise of the user.
Yes, the example with overtraining was not the most appropriate, sorry. But you can choose whatever physiological trait you want.
Technology, as I see that, as I am not so “clinically” oriented, can be very useful in terms of first principles that directly or indirectly can affect a training session (can be a training itself). But I’m not thinking about something to be plugged exclusively. But now I more clearly understand your point, thanks.
we’re speaking about sport…contest…on the field…
No problem 
Actually I’m working on two technologies for recovery, low level magnetic bioresonance mattres and grounding technology.
Chiropractic or osteophaty session, at visceral, spinal and cranial level is really usefull for ANS regulation.
I’ve tested much tools, but at the moment I’ve really good results with the above mentioned.
@ESTI: LLLT is a great tools, but in Italy, many Medical Doctor are counter many new therapeutic or recovery approaches.
Omega Wave is overpriced…there are a lot of options, much cheaper and IMO effective.
(I’ve bad experience from DiffECG from OW in example, I prefer other tests)
Right! I agree…
I agree with No23 about fitness test.
But we have to speak about kind of test and not mix different areas.
Vo2Max is a fitness test, and It’s usefull for control the start point and then progressive results from a kind of training, but Vo2 Max doesn’t tell you about your inner staus of your regulatory mechanism (functional reserve and adaptation in brief).
I can do HRV or similar, every day, 3 times a week etc…Vo2Max every day is stupid to do.
This is because I say it’s a waste of time.
Leave it to sport lab and medical doctors.
PS: lactate is another argument really interesting, there are a lot of test to do, from carbo load to metabolic fatigue…and training organization.
@speedcoach: recovery is not so simple to evaluate with only the help of your eyes or with experience specially when you work with a team and have different athletes with different skills.
At the end if you have enought informations about recovery, it’s not a bad thing!
Just to make my own position on Vo2 clear.
In ‘general’ I think it is very important.
The ability to manage O2 is critical to all sports and every sport.
I don’t think testing it is useful however and focusing on it is less important. Monitoring it is however - like Jamirok says though, not on a daily basis.
Every 6 weeks is fine - 4 if you’re paranoid.
I agree to this. Unfortunately, the soccer players who workout with me in off-season, all of them have fitness tests the first week of practice. Not one school out of the 20 I’ve come across, decided it wasn’t important.
I guess the question is how does one go about “breaking” tradition of this? Ultimately, it has to come from those in charge of the program/team.
Examples of tests used:
*Danish Test:
*2mile run
*Cooper
*Beep (continuous and intermittent recovery)
*1 mile
*“Gauntlet” consisting of 1 mile, rest 2 min, 1/2 mile, rest 2 min, 1/4 mile, rest 2 min, 2x200m, rest 35 second, 8x36yd (rest 15 second).
*Manchester Utd recovery test
Most common test is the 2 mile run, then intermittent beep.
Yeh, you’ll not change it really, all you can do is do your own work and let them test what they want to.
Charlie had some funny stories about test days - he had much the same problem of course with ice hockey players.
Thanks a lot.
- now I guess: Oschman?
- please tell me one country where many doctors are in favour or new therapeutic or recovery approaches. It’s not that Italy is so different.
In the West anyway …
Tell me about it!
I’ve had experience in Germany and new technology and complementary approaches are welcome!
France, I know a guy in a team that have a 360° medical doctor and physio.
Ditto for Holland.
Speaking about ARP, other European country are much open…respect to Italy.
In Span, Applied Kinesiology is a must…
Italy has a really closed medical lobby…
I go…it’s late for me…
Jamirok,
I agree eyes don’t cut it, although I don’t train a massive amount of athletes. Just a visual on body language. Love to PM you if ok with a few questions. Unfortunately, I don’t get to control my players conditioning when season starts. I get them fit and prepped, then they get smashed in camp by coaches who have no clue what recovery looks like. They treat it as though the body can endlessly endure whatever they throw at them, and if they don’t peform, they are out of shape or lazy. The life of a private athletic prep coach.
PM me when you want.
The life of a “modern” physical coach is not simple, old school coach are too much interested to do their work, at any cost!!!