|
Force matters. Time matters. And in sport, the interaction between the two may be more important than looking at either quality in isolation.
An individual might be incredibly strong, but sporting actions rarely provide unlimited time to produce that force. Sprinting, jumping, cutting, throwing, and reacting to an opponent often require meaningful amounts of force to be generated within fractions of a second. This is the force–time relationship. Understanding this relationship can change how we think about strength, power, rate of force development (RFD), plyometrics, and athletic development as a whole. Force Is Always Produced Within Time Imagine a simple force–time curve. Force is represented on the vertical axis. Time is represented on the horizontal axis. When an individual begins producing force, the curve rises. How quickly that curve rises and how high it eventually reaches provide different information about their physical capabilities. Given enough time, an individual may be capable of producing very high levels of force. But sport introduces a problem: You don’t always have enough time. A heavy squat may allow substantially more time to develop force than a sprint ground contact. A non-countermovement jump provides a different time constraint than a repeated ankle jump. An athlete accelerating from a static position encounters a different force–time problem than one redirecting after reacting to an opponent. The available time changes. And when the available time changes, so does the problem. Maximum Force Doesn’t Tell the Entire Story Maximal strength provides an important foundation for athletic development. But knowing how much force an individual can eventually produce doesn’t necessarily tell us how much force they can generate during the first fractions of a second. Consider two individuals who eventually reach similar levels of force. One individual’s force–time curve rises rapidly. The other’s rises more gradually. Given enough time, their outputs may look similar. But shorten the available time and suddenly there may be a meaningful difference. This is why rate of force development (RFD) becomes important. RFD describes how quickly force increases over time. In simple terms: RFD = Change in Force ÷ Change in Time. The steeper the rise in the force–time curve, the greater the rate at which force is being developed. Early vs. Late RFD We can broadly examine RFD across different portions of the force–time curve. Early-Stage RFD Early RFD occurs during the initial phase of force production and is heavily influenced by neural factors. These include:
The nervous system has to organize muscular activity quickly. This becomes particularly important when the available time for producing force is extremely short. Think about responding to an opponent, rapidly repositioning the body, initiating a sprint, or performing an explosive movement with minimal preparation. There simply isn’t much time. Late-Stage RFD As more time becomes available, muscular factors make an increasingly important contribution. These can include:
This is one reason maximal strength still matters. Increasing an individual’s strength can influence their ability to produce force, particularly when an action provides enough time for those qualities to contribute. The important point is that different portions of the force–time curve represent different demands. The Time Available Changes the Solution This concept becomes especially interesting when we move outside the weight room. Sport doesn’t provide the same amount of time on every repetition. An individual might have more time when accelerating from a static position. A defender matching to an offensive participant may have significantly less. A countermovement jump allows an individual to organize force differently than a rapid rebound jump. A planned change of direction provides a different preparation window than an unexpected change of direction. Same human. Different time constraint. Potentially different movement solution. This is why we shouldn’t think about force production only in terms of how much. We should also consider when. Impulse: Force × Time Another useful concept within the force–time relationship is impulse. Impulse represents force applied over a period of time. In simplified terms: Impulse = Force × Time. This helps explain why both variables matter. If more time is available, an individual may be able to generate the necessary impulse without producing force as rapidly. When time becomes limited, the strategy changes. The individual may need to generate meaningful force much earlier. This has major implications for sprinting, jumping, cutting, landing, and other explosive actions. The goal isn’t simply to produce the greatest force possible. It’s to produce an appropriate amount of force within the time available to solve the movement problem. Training Across the Force–Time Continuum This is where training design becomes important. There isn’t one exercise or method that develops every portion of the force–time relationship equally. Heavy strength training provides one stimulus. Isometrics provide another. Ballistic movements provide another. Sprinting, jumping, and plyometrics introduce increasingly different time constraints. Rather than searching for the single “best” exercise, we can expose individuals to a spectrum of force–time demands. That might include:
Each represents a different opportunity to interact with force and time. Manipulate Time as a Constraint Time itself can also become a powerful training constraint. Consider jumping. A non-countermovement jump begins from a relatively static position. A countermovement jump introduces a rapid eccentric-to-concentric transition. A drop-in jump adds momentum before takeoff. A reflexive jump can further reduce preparation time. The movement goal may remain similar: Jump. But manipulating how the individual enters the movement changes the force–time problem. We can do the same thing with acceleration, change of direction, throwing, and other athletic actions. Change the starting position. Change the approach. Add momentum. Introduce an opponent. Manipulate the available space. Introduce uncertainty. Reduce preparation time. Suddenly, the individual must reorganize how force is produced. From Predictable to Unpredictable This is also where physical preparation begins interacting with perception and decision-making. In controlled environments, individuals often know exactly when they need to produce force. Sport isn’t always that generous. An opponent moves. Space opens. A ball changes direction. A teammate creates an opportunity. Now the individual must first perceive information, recognize an opportunity, and organize an action, all while the available time continues disappearing. The force–time relationship is no longer purely a muscular problem. It exists inside a larger movement problem. This is why small sided games can complement more controlled strength, sprint, and plyometric work. We’re not replacing physical development. We’re changing the context in which those physical qualities must be used. Don’t Just Ask “How Much?” When evaluating or designing training, it’s easy to focus on output: How much weight? How much force? How high? How far? How fast? Those numbers matter. But another question deserves equal consideration: How much time was available? A high-force action performed over a relatively long duration represents a different problem than generating meaningful force almost immediately. Neither is inherently better. They’re simply different. And athletic development requires exposure to different parts of that continuum. Train for the Time Available The force–time relationship reminds us that strength and explosiveness aren’t separate worlds. They’re different parts of a continuum. Maximal strength matters. Rate of force development matters. Impulse matters. Movement context matters. And time connects them all. Our goal shouldn’t be to live exclusively on one end of the spectrum. Instead, develop individuals who can produce force across a variety of time constraints, from slower, high-force strength activities to rapid, dynamic sporting actions. Because sport doesn’t ask only: How much force can you produce? It also asks: How much force can you produce in the time you’re given? Force matters. But force without considering time only tells part of the story.
0 Comments
Every movement in sport is shaped by intention. An athlete accelerating to create and exploit space has a different problem to solve than a defender accelerating to close and control that same space. On the surface, the movements may look similar. Both athletes might accelerate, decelerate, change direction, or reposition their bodies. But underneath the movement, the problem is different.
The information being perceived is different. The athlete’s attention is different. The timing is different. And the movement solution that emerges can be completely different. This is an important distinction when designing athletic development environments. Movement Doesn’t Exist in Isolation It is easy to look at sport through a purely biomechanical lens. We see a cut and analyze the foot plant. We see an acceleration and examine projection angles. We see a deceleration and evaluate how the athlete manages their center of mass. Those qualities matter. But movement in sport doesn’t happen simply because an athlete needs to demonstrate a particular technique. Movement happens for a reason. The athlete is trying to accomplish something within an environment. A basketball player accelerates to attack an opening. A soccer defender accelerates to close down an attacker. A lacrosse player changes direction to escape pressure. A hockey defender adjusts speed and positioning to eliminate an opponent’s available space. The physical action is connected to an intention. That intention influences what information the athlete searches for, what opportunities they perceive, and ultimately how they organize movement. Offensive Behaviors: Creating Problems Offensive behavior is largely about creating and exploiting opportunities. The athlete is searching for information that allows them to manipulate the environment and create an advantage. This can include:
Consider an offensive athlete approaching a defender. Their objective isn’t simply to demonstrate a technically perfect change of direction. They may accelerate to force the defender to retreat. They may hesitate to disrupt timing. They may use deception to shift the defender’s attention or center of mass. They may change direction because a new opening becomes available. Or they may continue straight ahead because the defender has already surrendered the space. The movement solution emerges from the interaction between the athlete, opponent, task, and environment. The offensive athlete’s intention shapes the behavior. Defensive Behaviors: Solving Problems The defender operates within the same environment but experiences a very different problem. Instead of creating space, the defender may be trying to close or control it. Instead of creating uncertainty, they are attempting to manage it. Defensive behaviors can include:
A defender doesn’t necessarily need to move every time the offensive athlete moves. Sometimes the best solution is patience. Sometimes it is closing space aggressively. Sometimes it is positioning the body to remove one option while intentionally leaving another available. The defender must continually interpret information and adjust their behavior accordingly. Again, movement is not simply a mechanical response. It is an intentional solution to a problem. Same movement. Different intention. This distinction becomes especially important when we think about acceleration and change of direction training. Imagine two athletes accelerating five yards. Athlete A is attacking an opening before a defender can close it. Athlete B is chasing an opponent and attempting to eliminate that opening. Both are accelerating. But they aren’t necessarily solving the same movement problem. Their visual attention may be directed toward different information. Their timing may be different. Their starting positions may be different. Their ability to change speed may be influenced by the opponent. Their next action may depend entirely on what happens during those five yards. This is why reproducing the appearance of a sporting movement isn’t necessarily the same as reproducing the problem that creates it. Context matters. Perception, Intention, & Action Are Connected Sport requires athletes to continuously perceive information and organize actions around it. An athlete doesn’t simply execute a stored movement pattern independent of the environment. They search for information. They recognize opportunities. They act. The environment changes. They reorganize. This creates a continuous relationship between perception and action. Intention helps organize this relationship by determining which information becomes meaningful. For an offensive participant, an open lane may represent an opportunity to attack. For a defender, that same lane represents space that needs to be protected. Same space. Different information. Different behavior. This is one reason athletic development should extend beyond predetermined movement patterns. We need environments where athletes have opportunities to perceive, decide, act, and adapt. Why Role Reversibility Matters This brings us to an important concept: Role reversibility. Role reversibility means allowing athletes to experience both sides of the same problem. Instead of always assigning one athlete to offense and another to defense, switch the roles. Let the attacker become the defender. Let the defender become the attacker. The environment can remain nearly identical while the athlete’s intention completely changes. This provides a powerful learning opportunity. Offense learns what defense is trying to take away. By experiencing the defensive role, offensive athletes can begin to appreciate positioning, pressure, timing, and how defenders attempt to reduce available options. Defense learns to recognize offensive intentions. By experiencing the offensive role, defenders gain firsthand experience with deception, changes of speed, manipulation of space, and the information attackers use to create opportunities. Each role provides information about the other. Role Reversibility Builds Better Problem-Solvers Role reversibility isn’t simply about making training more variable. It can help athletes develop a deeper understanding of the interaction occurring between themselves, their opponents, teammates, and available space. A defender who understands offensive intentions may become better at recognizing meaningful cues. An attacker who understands defensive intentions may become better at manipulating those cues. Over time, athletes aren’t simply collecting more movement techniques. They’re developing a broader understanding of why, when, and where different movement solutions may be useful. That distinction matters. Sport doesn’t reward the athlete who can reproduce the largest collection of predetermined movement patterns. It rewards the athlete who can find effective solutions as the problem changes. Designing Training Around Intentions This changes the coach’s role. Rather than always asking: “What movement do I want the athlete to perform?” We can also ask: “What problem do I want the athlete to solve?” If we want offensive behaviors, we can design situations that encourage athletes to create and exploit space, manipulate opponents, deceive, collaborate, and recognize opportunities. If we want defensive behaviors, we can create situations where athletes must close space, control options, recognize cues, manage uncertainty, and coordinate with others. Then we can reverse the roles. The activity becomes the vehicle for exposing athletes to different intentions and different problems. We aren’t removing biomechanics from the training process. We’re giving biomechanics context. From Movement Reproduction to Movement Adaptability Athletic development shouldn’t only prepare athletes to produce movement. It should help prepare them to adapt movement to the information available in the moment. That requires exposure to different intentions. Different roles. Different opponents. Different spaces. Different problems. And different solutions. Offense and defense may occupy the same environment, but they don’t experience that environment in the same way. Their intentions shape what they perceive. What they perceive shapes the opportunities available to them. And those opportunities shape the movements that emerge. Movement is more than what the athlete does. It is why they are doing it. Design the problem. Change the intention. Reverse the roles. Then allow the athlete to solve it. At The U of Strength, we don’t call it strength training. We call it force development. That distinction matters.
Strength is certainly important, but simply increasing the amount of weight an athlete can lift does not tell us the whole story. Sport requires athletes to interact with forces constantly. They must accept force, produce force, transmit force, redirect force, and express force, often within fractions of a second and under constantly changing conditions. The weight room can help build the physical resources required to solve these problems, but those resources are only part of the process. The question isn’t simply: How strong is the athlete? A more useful question is: How much force does the athlete possess, and how effectively can they express it when the environment demands it? This leads us to an important distinction between force potential and force expression. Force Potential vs. Force Expression We view force development through two interconnected lenses. 1. Force Potential Force potential represents the athlete’s capacity to generate force. It can be influenced by factors such as muscular capacity, neural output, coordination, tissue qualities, training experience, and the athlete’s ability to organize their body against resistance. In simple terms: How much force does the athlete have available? The weight room provides us with an environment where we can intentionally expand this capacity. But possessing force is different from being able to use it. 2. Force Expression Force expression is the athlete’s ability to access and apply their available force within the time, space, and informational constraints of movement. Sport rarely provides athletes with unlimited preparation time. They must accelerate when space appears. Decelerate when an opponent changes direction. Reorganize their body after contact. Jump from imperfect positions. Redirect force when their original movement solution is no longer available. The athlete may possess tremendous force potential, but the sporting environment determines how much of that potential can actually be expressed. This is why weight room numbers alone cannot define athletic performance. Force potential is what the athlete possesses. Force expression is what the athlete can access when the situation demands it. You Can’t Express What You Don’t Possess While force expression matters tremendously, force potential cannot be ignored. There is a simple relationship: You can’t express force you don’t possess. Developing greater physical capacities expands the athlete’s potential movement toolbox. This is particularly important throughout long-term athletic development. Resistance training can help athletes develop greater physical capacity, improve coordination under load, increase tolerance to force, and provide additional movement options. But the objective isn’t simply to make the athlete stronger. The objective is to develop physical resources that can eventually become useful outside the weight room. For that reason, we organize our force potential development around three interconnected qualities: Acceptance. Production. Transmission. 1. Force Acceptance: Yielding Force acceptance refers to the athlete’s ability to receive, manage, and organize force entering the system. Think about the demands of sport: Landing from a jump. Decelerating from high speed. Lowering the center of mass before changing direction. Managing contact from an opponent. Transitioning from one movement solution into another. The athlete isn’t simply “absorbing” force. They are actively organizing themselves around the forces created by the environment. We often use yielding strategies to develop this capacity. These may include different landing variations, “fake” throws, eccentric actions, deceleration problems, and other environments that expose athletes to different magnitudes, directions, and durations of force. The goal isn’t to create one perfect position. It is to expand the athlete’s ability to successfully manage force across many situations. 2. Force Production: Overcoming Force production is probably what most people associate with traditional strength training. The athlete must generate enough force to overcome an external resistance. Squatting. Pressing. Pulling. Jumping.. These are all examples of force production. But simply increasing load is not the only way to develop this quality. We can manipulate resistance, range of motion, starting position, velocity, intent, stance, and many other constraints to change the problem presented to the athlete. This is where individualization becomes important. The athlete shouldn’t have to fit the exercise. The exercise should fit the athlete. Instead of forcing every athlete through identical exercises and progressions, we can manipulate the training environment based on what the athlete needs. The exercise is simply a vehicle. The adaptation is the destination. 3. Force Transmission: Elasticity Force does not simply need to be accepted or produced. It also needs to move efficiently through the system. This is where force transmission becomes important. We associate transmission with elasticity, the athlete’s ability to rapidly manage and transfer force through interconnected segments of the body. Sprinting provides a simple example. At high speeds, athletes do not have unlimited time to produce force against the ground. Ground contact opportunities become increasingly brief. The athlete must arrive prepared to interact with the ground, manage the incoming forces, and rapidly redirect those forces into the next action. This requires more than strength. It requires timing. Rhythm. Coordination. Pretensioning. Stiffness where necessary. Compliance where necessary. And the ability to organize those qualities at speed. Elastic training therefore becomes another important piece of the force development puzzle. These Qualities Don’t Exist in Isolation Acceptance, production, and transmission are useful categories for organizing training, but the human body doesn’t experience them as isolated qualities. Every athletic action contains some interaction between them. An athlete sprinting must accept force when the foot contacts the ground, transmit force through the system, and produce force to project into the next step. An athlete changing direction must manage incoming momentum, reorganize their body, and produce force into a new direction. An athlete landing from a jump must manage force before transitioning into whatever action comes next. The goal of training isn’t to create athletes who are great at isolated categories. The goal is to provide them with physical resources they can integrate into adaptable movement solutions. Bridging Force Potential & Force Expression This is where athletic development becomes more interesting. The weight room can increase force potential. But sport asks athletes to express that potential under very different conditions. Sport contains uncertainty. Opponents. Teammates. Time pressure. Limited space. Changing visual information. Fatigue. Contact. Emotional pressure. No perfectly controlled weight room environment can completely recreate those demands, and it shouldn’t try to. Instead, we can view training as a continuum. On one side, we develop the athlete’s physical resources. On the other, we create environments that require athletes to explore how those resources can be expressed. Resistance training, sprinting, jumping, landing activities, and small sided games can all play different roles within that process. The goal is not to make everything look like the sport. The goal is to build capacity and create opportunities for that capacity to become usable. Develop the Human, Not the Exercise This is ultimately why we prefer the term force development. Strength training can unintentionally become centered around exercises. What is your squat? What is your bench? What is your deadlift? How much weight did you add? Those numbers can provide useful information, but they are not the athlete. At The U of Strength, we’re interested in the larger system. Can the athlete accept force? Can they produce it? Can they transmit it? Can they redirect it? Can they access it quickly? Can they organize it from different positions? And ultimately: Can they express it when the environment demands it? The weight room should expand the athlete’s movement possibilities, not restrict them to a collection of exercises. Because the goal isn’t to create better lifters. The goal is to develop athletes with a larger toolbox of force solutions available when sport asks them to solve a problem. Sport is complex.
Athletes are constantly required to perceive information, make decisions, organize their bodies, and adapt their movement solutions based on what is happening around them. The question for coaches is: How do we prepare athletes for complexity without immediately overwhelming them with complexity? Two approaches often used in motor learning are task decomposition and task simplification. Although both can make a difficult task more manageable, they accomplish it in very different ways. Task Decomposition Task decomposition involves breaking a complex movement problem into smaller, isolated components. Instead of practicing the complete task, we remove certain elements and train individual pieces separately. A common example in athletic development is a closed change of direction drill. The athlete may know:
The physical movement may resemble something that occurs during competition, but much of the information that normally regulates that movement has been removed. There is no opponent to read. There is no space to protect or attack. There is little uncertainty. There may be no meaningful decision. The movement has been separated from the environment that normally gives it purpose. This doesn’t mean decomposition can never have value. There may be situations where temporarily isolating a component allows an athlete to explore or develop a particular physical capacity. The problem occurs when isolated movement becomes the destination rather than a bridge toward more representative behavior. Task Simplification Task simplification takes a different approach. Instead of breaking the problem apart, we keep the problem intact while reducing its complexity. The athlete still has to perceive. The athlete still has to decide. The athlete still has to act. But the environment is manipulated so the problem is more manageable for the individual. At The U of Strength, this may involve manipulating:
Instead of removing perception and decision-making, we adjust the environment around them. Simplify the Environment, Not the Athlete Consider a developing youthlete learning to solve a 1v1 situation. We could begin with a predetermined cone drill. The athlete knows where to run and where to cut. They can repeatedly practice the movement pattern, but the decision has already been made for them. Or we could create a simplified 1v1. Reduce the playing space. Slow the starting velocity. Give each participant one clear objective. Limit the number of possible outcomes. Now the activity is easier to manage, but something important remains:
Perception & Action Remain Connected This distinction matters because movement in sport does not occur independently of information. Athletes perceive to act and act to perceive. An offensive athlete changing direction because a defender closes space is solving a different problem than an athlete changing direction because a cone tells them where to cut. The physical shapes might occasionally look similar. The process that created them is not. When we completely remove the information surrounding movement, we risk training the movement separately from the perceptual information that gives it meaning. Task simplification allows us to reduce difficulty while maintaining this perception-action relationship. Complexity Should Be a Dial Representative training does not mean every activity needs maximum chaos. More uncertainty isn’t automatically better. More participants aren’t automatically better. Faster isn’t automatically better. Complexity should be treated as a dial rather than an on/off switch. For inexperienced athletes, we can turn the dial down. As their action capabilities and experience develop, we can gradually turn it up. Add space. Increase velocity. Introduce another participant. Expand the available choices. Change the numerical relationship. Create an advantage or disadvantage. Manipulate the rules. Increase uncertainty. The environment grows alongside the athlete. This allows us to expose youthletes to uncertainty without throwing them immediately into situations they aren’t prepared to solve. Build Toward the Messiness of Sport The goal isn’t to make training complicated simply because sport is complicated. The goal is to create an appropriate relationship between the athlete and the problem. Sometimes that means reducing velocity. Sometimes it means reducing the number of participants. Sometimes it means shrinking the space or simplifying the rules. But whenever possible, we want to preserve the information that allows athletes to perceive, decide, and adapt. Don’t automatically break the movement into pieces. Simplify the problem. Scale the environment. Manage the uncertainty. Then gradually expose the athlete to more information and more possible solutions. Because eventually, the game gets messy. Our job is to help athletes become comfortable solving problems when it does. Meaningful speed and gamespeed development require more than teaching athletes how to move. Sport is a constantly changing environment. Athletes must perceive information, make decisions, organize their bodies, apply force, and adapt their actions in real time.
That means our training environments need to develop both how athletes move and how they interact with the information around them. At The U of Strength, we use five gamespeed principles to guide the design of these environments. 1. Appreciating Space Space is never static. Open lanes appear and disappear. Gaps close. Angles change. Teammates and opponents constantly reshape the available movement options. Athletes must learn to perceive these changes and understand how space can be attacked, protected, created, or manipulated. Our activities intentionally keep the spatial environment dynamic so athletes are required to continuously identify opportunities and adjust their movement accordingly. See the space. Understand the space. Manipulate the space. 2. Respecting Speed Speed isn’t simply about moving as fast as possible. Effective athletes understand when to accelerate, when to decelerate, when to maintain speed, and when to change tempo. The ability to regulate speed is often more important than simply producing maximal velocity. Training should therefore give athletes opportunities to modulate their speed based on what is happening around them, not based solely on a predetermined instruction. Speed is a tool. Knowing when and how to use it is the skill. 3. Managing Uncertainty Sport is unpredictable. The opponent doesn’t follow a script. The ball doesn’t always arrive where expected. Teammates make unexpected movements. Opportunities can appear and disappear in an instant. Training should expose athletes to this uncertainty. By manipulating constraints, changing task demands, introducing variability, and avoiding excessive repetition of identical solutions, athletes learn to perceive, anticipate, adapt, and act without knowing exactly what will happen next. The goal isn’t to create athletes who are experts at reproducing one solution. It’s to develop athletes who can find solutions. 4. Being Comfortable in Uncomfortable Conditions Competition rarely gives athletes perfect positions, perfect surfaces, or perfect amounts of time. They may have to accelerate from awkward positions, change direction while off-balance, make decisions while fatigued, or produce force when their body isn’t organized exactly as they would prefer. These situations aren’t errors in the system. They’re part of the system. Training environments should provide athletes with opportunities to experience unfavorable positions and unexpected perturbations, forcing them to self-organize and solve movement problems. 5. Team Synergies Sport is a collective problem. An athlete’s movement doesn’t happen in isolation. Teammates, opponents, the ball, space, and the actions of others all influence what happens next. Team-based activities develop the ability to coordinate movement, communicate, share timing, and respond to the intentions of others. The goal isn’t simply to make individuals “better” movers. It’s to develop athletes who can connect their actions with the actions of others. From Gamespeed to Biomechanics Gamespeed principles describe the environment in which movement occurs. Biomechanical principles help us understand the movement solutions that emerge within that environment. We aren’t trying to force every athlete into one “perfect” technique. Instead, we look for attractors, movement characteristics that tend to help athletes solve particular problems effectively. Key Attractors of Acceleration Acceleration requires an athlete to effectively project the body and organize force application relative to the desired direction. Some of the key attractors we look for include: 1. Lower center of gravity
These aren’t positions we demand. They are solutions we create opportunities for athletes to discover and refine. Key Attractors for Change of Direction Change of direction introduces another layer of complexity. The athlete must manage existing momentum, reorganize the body, apply force, and redirect the center of mass toward the next action, often within a very limited amount of time. Some of the attractors we look for include: 1. An effective relationship between the center of mass & base of support 2. Foot placement outside the hip crease 3. A foot plant from above that allows the athlete to effectively accept & redirect force 4. Generating force opposite the subsequent action 5. Steering the foot through inside- & outside-edge control Again, these aren’t rigid technical positions. Context matters. The athlete’s speed, direction, intent, task, opponent, surface, fatigue, and available space can all change the solution. That’s why we focus less on creating a single “correct” movement and more on expanding an athlete’s movement bandwidth. Connecting the Pieces Gamespeed and biomechanics shouldn’t exist as separate training worlds. The environment provides the problem. The athlete perceives the problem, selects an action, and organizes the body to solve it. Sometimes that solution looks clean and predictable. Sometimes it looks awkward. Sometimes it changes from repetition to repetition. That’s the nature of sport. Our job isn’t to eliminate variability. It’s to create environments where athletes can develop the physical capabilities, perceptual skills, and adaptability required to navigate it. Appreciate space. Respect speed. Manage uncertainty. Become comfortable in uncomfortable conditions. Build team synergies. Then give athletes the opportunity to discover the movement solutions that allow them to thrive. |
AuthorJamie Smith is a proud husband and father, passionate about all things relating to athletic development and a life long learner, who is open to unorthodox ideas as long they are beneficial to his athletes. Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
Services |
The Gym |
|
Tel: (860) 833-9366
Email: [email protected]
*By accessing this website and/or purchasing or utilizing the articles, emails, programs, images, videos, services and/or products, you are agreeing to this disclaimer in its entirety. The content on this website and the educational products sold within are the intellectual property of The U of Strength, LLC and may not be replicated, reproduced, or sold without prior written consent from The U of Strength, LLC. Website, social media and product content provided is for informational purposes and meant to be utilized by athletes, sport coaches, and fitness professionals at their own discretion. It is not meant to substitute advice or guidance from qualified medical experts, and misuse of the information can result in serious injury. Any fitness program should be administered under the discretion of qualified professionals who take into account individual differences in health and ability. While our programs have found success with the athletes who train at our facility, individual results vary and we do not guarantee any specific results. The U of Strength, LLC assumes no liability from the misuse of the content provided or products purchased. Users assume all risk when implementing our ideas in theirs or their clients’ real life training experiences.
Email: [email protected]
*By accessing this website and/or purchasing or utilizing the articles, emails, programs, images, videos, services and/or products, you are agreeing to this disclaimer in its entirety. The content on this website and the educational products sold within are the intellectual property of The U of Strength, LLC and may not be replicated, reproduced, or sold without prior written consent from The U of Strength, LLC. Website, social media and product content provided is for informational purposes and meant to be utilized by athletes, sport coaches, and fitness professionals at their own discretion. It is not meant to substitute advice or guidance from qualified medical experts, and misuse of the information can result in serious injury. Any fitness program should be administered under the discretion of qualified professionals who take into account individual differences in health and ability. While our programs have found success with the athletes who train at our facility, individual results vary and we do not guarantee any specific results. The U of Strength, LLC assumes no liability from the misuse of the content provided or products purchased. Users assume all risk when implementing our ideas in theirs or their clients’ real life training experiences.