|
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.
0 Comments
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. 8/19/2026 Athletic Development & Bioenergetics: Why We Prioritize the A-Lactic & Aerobic SystemsRead NowAthletic development is not simply about making athletes stronger, faster, or better conditioned. It is about developing the biological systems that allow athletes to perceive, decide, move, adapt, and perform repeatedly.
One of the most important considerations in that process is bioenergetics, the way the body produces and replenishes energy during activity. For simplicity, we can organize energy contribution into three primary systems:
All three systems are always contributing to some degree. The goal isn’t to isolate one system completely from the others. Instead, the goal is to understand how different training environments bias each system and how those biases influence athletic development. At The U of Strength, we spend the majority of our training time emphasizing the a-lactic and aerobic systems. Why? Because they complement one another. The a-lactic system allows athletes to express high levels of force and speed without accumulating large amounts of metabolic fatigue. The aerobic system helps athletes recover between those high-intensity efforts and supports the ability to repeat them. The lactic system has a place in athletic development, but we don’t want it dominating the training environment. The A-Lactic System: Generating High Effort Movement The a-lactic system is primarily responsible for providing energy during very short, high-intensity efforts. Think:
These actions require energy quickly. The a-lactic system provides that energy through stored ATP and phosphocreatine without relying heavily on glycolysis. From an athletic development perspective, this matters because these short efforts allow us to pursue high-quality movement without excessive metabolic interference. When fatigue is relatively low, athletes have greater opportunities to:
This is especially important when training is designed around motor learning rather than simply accumulating work. We don’t want athletes spending every session trying to survive fatigue. We want them learning how to solve problems. The Aerobic System: The Recovery Engine The aerobic system is often associated with long-duration endurance work. But that is only part of the story. For team-sport athletes, the aerobic system plays an enormous role in what happens between high-intensity actions. An athlete may sprint for two seconds, decelerate, walk, reposition, jump, accelerate again, and repeat. The high-intensity actions may be primarily a-lactic. The recovery between those actions relies heavily on aerobic metabolism. This creates an important relationship:
The better we develop the ability to recover aerobically, the more effectively an athlete can repeatedly express high-intensity actions. This is why we don’t view aerobic development as something that necessarily requires long, monotonous conditioning sessions. We can develop the aerobic system through appropriately designed small sided games, extensive work, tempo-based activities, and low-intensity (long duration isometrics, plyometrics, med ball throws, etc.) actions. The context matters. Why We Spend So Much Time in the A-Lactic + Aerobic Relationship The combination of a-lactic and aerobic training creates a powerful environment for athletic development. The athlete can experience high-quality actions while maintaining enough recovery capacity to continue learning. Consider a small sided game. An athlete might: Perceive > accelerate > decelerate > change direction > recover > perceive > accelerate again. The explosive actions place a greater demand on the a-lactic system. The recovery periods allow the aerobic system to contribute to energy restoration and recovery. The athlete is simultaneously developing:
This is much closer to the demands of sport than simply asking an athlete to perform repeated conditioning intervals until exhaustion. The Lactic System: A Different Cost The lactic system is involved when moderate intensity activity continues beyond the capacity of the a-lactic system alone. The problem is not using the lactic system. The problem is overusing it. As glycolytic contribution increases, metabolic fatigue increases. And when metabolic fatigue becomes the dominant feature of the training environment, something changes. Movement behaviors can change. Decision-making can change. Attention can change. Coordination can change. Perception can change. The athlete’s available movement solutions can become narrower. Instead of exploring and adapting, the athlete increasingly searches for ways to simply complete the task. That distinction matters. Fatigue Can Change the Learning Environment Imagine asking an athlete to solve a complex movement problem. They must perceive an opponent, determine where space is available, select an action, and execute it. Now repeat that task under significant metabolic fatigue. The athlete may still complete the activity. But are they learning the same thing? Probably not. Fatigue isn’t simply a physiological variable. It changes the information available to the athlete and the way the athlete interacts with that information. This is why we are careful about using high-lactic environments when the primary objective is motor learning or high-quality performance. If the athlete is exhausted, we may unintentionally shift the objective from: “Can you solve this problem?” to: “Can you survive this problem?” Those are very different training outcomes. Fitness vs. Athletic Development This is where athletic development differs from traditional “conditioning”. If the only objective is to increase the ability to tolerate metabolic stress, then repeatedly pushing athletes into high-lactic states can be effective. But athletic development has a broader objective. We want athletes who can: Perceive > Decide > Act > Recover > Repeat. That requires more than metabolic tolerance. It requires the integration of physical, perceptual, cognitive, emotional, and social qualities. Therefore, “conditioning” should not be viewed independently from skill development. The way we condition athletes influences the environment in which they learn. We Don’t Avoid Lactic Training, We Dose It There are moments when the lactic system needs to be challenged. Sport sometimes demands repeated high-intensity efforts with incomplete recovery. Athletes need exposure to those conditions. But exposure doesn’t mean domination. We want to strategically manipulate:
This allows us to create the appropriate metabolic stress for the objective. Sometimes the goal is to develop repeatability. Sometimes it is to expose athletes to discomfort. Sometimes it is to prepare them for the metabolic demands of their sport. But we don’t want every training session to become a test of how much fatigue an athlete can tolerate. Quality Over Exhaustion One of our fundamental principles is simple: The goal isn’t to make athletes tired. The goal is to make athletes awesome problem-solvers. Fatigue is a tool. It is not the objective. When we spend the majority of our training time in environments that favor the a-lactic and aerobic systems, we can maintain a better balance between expression and recovery. Athletes get opportunities to move explosively. They get opportunities to make decisions. They get opportunities to explore. They get opportunities to repeat actions without repeating the exact same movement. And they get opportunities to recover and do it again. The Bigger Picture Bioenergetics is not simply about deciding whether an athlete should sprint, jog, or run intervals. It is about understanding how energy availability influences the entire training environment. The a-lactic system gives us the ability to express high-intensity actions. The aerobic system helps us recover and repeat those actions. The lactic system allows us to tolerate sustained moderate intensity demands, but excessive reliance on it can create fatigue that interferes with the very qualities we are trying to develop. For athletic development, that often means spending more time where expression and recovery can coexist. That’s not “conditioning” for the sake of “conditioning”. That’s using bioenergetics to develop the complete athlete. One of the defining characteristics of our training philosophy is our willingness to intentionally introduce small doses of uncertainty, pressure, and controlled chaos into the learning environment. We often refer to these moments as small doses of “venom.”
At The U of Strength, we don’t avoid messy situations, we welcome them. To many, this approach can seem unconventional. Traditional training models often emphasize clean repetitions, predictable drills, and tightly scripted outcomes. Coaches strive to eliminate mistakes, reduce variability, and create technical consistency. While those methods may have their place, they often fail to reflect the environment athletes are actually preparing for. Sport is rarely clean. It’s unpredictable, emotionally demanding, and constantly changing. Every action is influenced by opponents, teammates, available space, fatigue, pressure, and countless variables that cannot be rehearsed in isolation. If competition is chaotic, shouldn’t preparation expose athletes to manageable doses of that same chaos? We believe the answer is yes. Why We Embrace Messy Environments Gamespeed is often misunderstood as simply moving faster. In reality, gamespeed is the ability to perceive information, make effective decisions, and organize movement under constantly changing conditions. Those qualities aren’t developed through perfectly rehearsed patterns alone. They emerge from environments filled with:
These environments force athletes to solve movement problems instead of simply executing predetermined solutions. Rather than asking, “Can you repeat the movement?” the question becomes, “Can you adapt when the movement changes?” That distinction matters. Every repetition presents a new problem. Athletes must continuously search, adjust, and reorganize their actions based on the information available to them. Over time, they begin developing something far more valuable than technical consistency, they develop adaptability. Discovering Individual Solutions One of the greatest benefits of chaotic environments is that they shift ownership back to the athlete. Instead of chasing a coach-prescribed “ideal” technique, athletes begin discovering movement solutions that fit their own current capabilities. No two athletes possess identical body structures, experiences, strengths, or movement histories. Why should they all move exactly the same? When we manipulate constraints instead of prescribing every action, athletes naturally self-organize toward effective solutions. They learn what works, what doesn’t, and how to adjust when circumstances change. This creates adaptable movers rather than robotic performers. Pressure Is a Teaching Tool Pressure is often viewed as something to minimize during practice. We see it differently. When applied appropriately, pressure becomes one of the most effective teaching tools available. It increases informational load. It raises emotional and physical demands. It accelerates perception-action coupling. It forces commitment instead of hesitation. Most importantly, pressure reveals behavior. It’s easy to execute movement when everything unfolds exactly as expected. The true learning begins when expectations disappear. Pressure amplifies chaos. Chaos exposes behavior. That’s where meaningful adaptation occurs. Small Doses Build Resilience The goal isn’t to overwhelm athletes. Just like medicine, dosage matters. Too little challenge creates comfort. Too much creates panic. Our responsibility is to provide the right amount of “venom” at the right time. Small enough that athletes can successfully adapt. Challenging enough that they must search for new solutions. Over time, these repeated exposures improve more than physical qualities. They strengthen decision-making, emotional regulation, confidence, resilience, and adaptability under stress. Athletes become more comfortable solving uncomfortable problems. Chaos Isn’t the Goal, Adaptability Is It’s important to understand that chaos itself isn’t the objective. We don’t create confusion simply to make training harder or more entertaining. Every perturbation, every constraint, and every layer of uncertainty has a purpose. Chaos is simply the vehicle. Adaptability is the destination. By carefully designing environments that expose athletes to manageable amounts of uncertainty, we prepare them for the reality of competition without overwhelming the learning process. Sport will eventually provide plenty of “venom.” A defender will disrupt your movement. The space you planned to attack will disappear. Your balance will be compromised. The game won’t slow down because you’re unprepared. Our job as coaches is to introduce those challenges before competition does, allowing athletes to build the physical, cognitive, and emotional capacity to respond. Because preparation isn’t about producing perfect movement. It’s about developing adaptable humans who can solve imperfect problems when the environment inevitably bites back. When coaches think about improving change of direction (COD), the conversation often revolves around foot placement, shin angles, or hip position.
While these matter, one of the most overlooked principles is much higher in the body: Keep the head as still as possible. The head serves as the platform for both the visual and vestibular systems. If it is moving excessively during acceleration, deceleration, or cutting, an athlete’s ability to perceive, decide, and execute movement solutions becomes less effective. Rather than focusing solely on the lower half, consider how the entire body is organized to provide a stable platform for gathering information. Vision Drives Movement Athletes don’t move because they have perfect technique. They move because they are constantly solving movement problems. Every change of direction requires the athlete to identify opponents, recognize available space, anticipate movement, and make decisions in fractions of a second. None of this is possible without relevant visual information. When the head bounces, rotates excessively, or whips from side to side, the eyes must continually stabilize the image before meaningful information can be attuned. This creates unnecessary “visual noise” that can delay perception and decision-making. Elite movers often appear smooth because their heads remain remarkably quiet while everything beneath them reorganizes to solve the movement problem. The Vestibular System: Your Internal Stabilizer Located within the inner ear, the vestibular system helps regulate balance, orientation, and shape control. A relatively stable head allows this system to operate smoothly, helping coordinate the body’s response to rapidly changing environments. During a cut, athletes experience substantial forces that challenge balance. If the head is moving excessively in multiple directions, the vestibular system has more work to do before the athlete can effectively redirect their body. The result is often slower, less efficient movement. Clearer Perception Leads to Faster Decisions In team sports, movement and decision-making are inseparable. Athletes must perceive, decide, and act simultaneously. If every foot strike causes the head to oscillate dramatically, athletes lose valuable milliseconds simply trying to stabilize their vision before interpreting what they see. Those milliseconds matter. The athlete who attunes information sooner often arrives first, not because they are physically faster, but because they recognized the opportunity earlier. Movement Efficiency Begins with Organization Highly skilled athletes coordinate their feet, legs, pelvis, and trunk so that the lower body manages and redirects forces while the head remains relatively calm. It almost appears as though the head is floating through space while the body changes direction beneath it. This doesn’t mean the head should be perfectly motionless. Some movement is both natural and necessary. The objective is to eliminate unnecessary movement that interferes with perception and control. Don’t Coach the Head, Design for It Telling athletes to “keep your head still” often produces stiff, robotic movement. Instead, create environments where head stability naturally emerges because it improves performance. For example:
Rather than instructing athletes to “keep your head still,” create environments that reward it. Design tasks that encourage athletes to organize themselves effectively while solving movement problems. When perception drives action, a stable head often becomes an emergent solution rather than a coached position. |
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.