Chi talks about some great information regarding the preparation of pre-adolescent athletes.  Chi gives some great practical applications regaring strength training and aerobic capacity for this young group as well as the importance of taking into consideration an athletes biological age, not just their chronological age.

Enjoy!

Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com

—

The astrology of soccer (about training pre-adolescents)

Any event with mass media exposure like the World Cup soccer will lead to mass sign-ups of fathers claiming their kid will turn pro one day. They want the best training money can buy, preparing them for their rightful place on the world stage. And that’s a good thing, if nothing else then sport should inspire! It’s your job to create the optimal environment for maximal development. To create a star however, means you have to respect the stars. If this kid is born in December, his chances to become a pro just went down fourfold in comparison with his age peers, born in January. That sounds pretty much like astrology to me. Your job, change fate!

Statistics

Dutch soccer conditioning expert Raymond Verheijen has found remarkable correlations. By checking the birth months of soccer professionals, he found that 43 percent was born in January, February and March. The rest of the soccer pros are born in the second (27%), third (20%) and last (10%) quarter. That’s an interesting correlation, because the month of birth should have no effect on talent. It doesn’t end here, because sports have an inherent risk of injuries, so kids born in the first quarter have a chance of 25 percent. The following quarters however show a dramatic upward trend of 40, 50 and 65 percent increased risk. Is it all astrology or is it physiology?

Cut-off dates

While watching a youth game, you’ll notice a difference in size of the players. Although they are in the same league and have the same age, the length difference can be up to 4 inch. It’s the result of a cut-off date January 1st. Even if you have the same age in years, the first quarter players can have a head start up to 11 months. First quarter players are larger, faster and less prone to injuries as a result of physical contact. They are more in possession of the ball and therefore easily noticed by scouts. So, it probably is not astrology, but can a strength and conditioning coach battle fate?

Energy

Pre-adolescents at the age of 6 to 11 can grow an inch a quarter and that requires a lot of energy. Intensive training swallows that energy and the statistics shows that it has a significant impact on the growth development. The energy debt leads to a fall on the growth curve to half an inch per quarter. During the summer rest, a growth surge is noticeable, an EPOC of growth if you will. It does not always compensate for the debt and some of the kids will stay behind the curve. This will leave them prone to injury. Before we see whether you can work around it, we have to answer the question whether training pre-adolescents is useful at all.

Fit by themselves

Before puberty sets in, there seems to be no difference in performance between girls and boys from the same age. Children are active and fit and will remain fit until the girls reach the age of 14 and boys turn 18. Besides this natural fitness, we see little or no results due to training. I’ve seen many mothers melting and many fathers screaming, at the sight of their little champion at age 5, kneeling down in the field to pluck a flower during an all-important match. Is lack of results due to lack of discipline (they are kids, you know), or is it hormone driven?

Getting results

To increase the aerobic capacity of children, you need to get the intensity up. As a general rule of thumb, you have to train around the anaerobic threshold to get a good aerobic gain (Katch V 1978, MacDougal JD 1977). This threshold lies around 75% HRmax for adults and for children a bit higher in the 85% HRmax range (Rotstein 1986). After a decent warm-up, you can progress to interval training with all-out sprints and with resting. It seems to have the largest effect on the VO2max for children as well (Baquet G 2003, McManus AM 2005). Do however keep the temperature in check, because children have less glands and therefore less effective thermoregulation. Two or three times interval training a week is ideal, more won’t increase the effect.

Strength training is also useful and several studies show that a frequency of two times a week, with an intensity of 70% RM in 1 to 2 sets will lead to good results. No hypertrophy is to be expected at that age. A nice circuit with 6 to 8 exercises that can be finished in 20 to 30 minutes would be commendable (Faigenbaum AD 2005, Vehrs PR 2005).

Health

Clearly exercise will induce a health benefit and the most active kids, whose fat were measured at age 12, were slimmer at age 14 and had three times less visceral fat than the most sedentary kids (Riddoch CJ 2009). Strength training has of course a positive effect on strength, but also on bone density. It also has a positive effect on their self-esteem (Faigenbaum 2005). If a kid falls behind the growth curve, it is probably wise to bring down the volume. Don’t be afraid to cut the team in half. Kids that were born in the first half year train three times a week, while the other half gets to train once or maybe twice a week. Although I implemented it for only a year, I’ve noticed positive results because of it. More fun, more self-esteem, less peer pressure and less injuries.

Putting it all together

Watch the length and the growth development of the children. Make sure that they exercise healthy and have fun at what they do. Keep them flexible and introduce other forms of trainings besides soccer. Although pre-adolescents gain less with training than adults, it can be useful. As a safe and sound guideline you can use:

Aerobic: twice a week, 85% HRmax interval for 30 minutes
Resistance: twice a week, 70% RM, 1-2 sets, 6-8 exercises

You can do strength training with weights, but also with body weight exercises during soccer practice. Although there are clear benefits to strength training, explaining goals to young children is not useful. The big difference between kids and adults is that an adult needs to know why he has to do something, while for kids it must be fun or new. Basic moves like lunges and squats are excellent, but you have to adjust them. For the young kids you can introduce frog leaping (explosive squats) while they have to circumvent storks (agility work). Or let them be storks and let them hop after the frogs (single leg squats) or let them take big strides (walking lunges). You can introduce weights as bars of gold or food they need to transport. So, hold your speeches and get crea(c)tive!

Conclusion

Having the same age in years does not mean that they have the same age metabolically. The difference of eleven months between kids of the same age, can make a huge difference. Although the science is not completely in yet, growth curves and birth months are practical indicators for appropriate training, volumes and scouting. It will add to your chances to get the most out of their potential. No astrology required, just basic science, a lot of love and common sense.

References

Baquet G (2003), van Praagh E, Berthoin S. Endurance training and aerobic fitness in young people. Sports Med. 2003;33(15):1127-43. Review.

Bernhardt DT (2001), Gomez J, Johnson MD, Martin TJ, Rowland TW, Small E, LeBlanc C, Malina R, Krein C, Young JC, Reed FE, Anderson SJ, Anderson SJ, Griesemer BA, Bar-Or O; Committee on Sports Medicine and Fitness. Strength training by children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2001 Jun;107(6):1470-2.

Blimkie CJ (1993) Resistance training during preadolescence. Issues and controversies. Sports Med. 1993 Jun;15(6):389-407. Review.

Faigenbaum AD (2005), Bellucci M, Bernieri A, Bakker B, Hoorens K. Acute effects of different warm-up protocols on fitness performance in children. J Strength Cond Res. 2005
May;19(2):376-81.

Katch V (1978), Weltman A, Sady S, Freedson P. Validity of the relative percent concept for equating training intensity. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1978 Oct 20;39(4):219-27.

Kraemer WJ (1988). Endocrine responses to resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1988 Oct;20(5 Suppl):S152-7. Review.

MacDougall JD (1977), Ward GR, Sale DG, Sutton JR. Biochemical adaptation of human skeletal muscle to heavy resistance training and immobilization. J Appl Physiol. 1977
Oct;43(4):700-3.

McManus AM (2005), Cheng CH, Leung MP, Yung TC, Macfarlane DJ. Improving aerobic power in primary school boys: a comparison of continuous and interval training. Int J Sports
Med. 2005 Nov;26(9):781-6.

Ozmun JC (1994), Mikesky AE, Surburg PR. Neuromuscular adaptations following prepubescent strength training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994 Apr;26(4):510-4.

Payne VG (1993), Morrow JR Jr. Exercise and VO2 max in children: a meta-analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1993 Sep;64(3):305-13.

Riddoch CJ (2009), Leary SD, Ness AR, Blair SN, Deere K, Mattocks C, Griffiths A, Davey Smith G, Tilling K. Prospective associations between objective measures of physical activity and fat mass in 12-14 year old children: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). BMJ. 2009 Nov 26;339:b4544./td>

Rotstein A (1986), Dotan R, Bar-Or O, Tenenbaum G. Effect of training on anaerobic threshold, maximal aerobic power and anaerobic performance of preadolescent boys. Int J Sports Med. 1986 Oct;7(5):281-6.

Vehrs PR (2005) Strength training in children and teens: implementing safe, effective and fun programs. ACSM Health & Fitness Journal. 2005:13-8

Verheijen R (2008) Het periodiseren van voetballen. ISBN 978-90-77217-20-7

Weltman A (1986), Janney C, Rians CB, Strand K, Berg B, Tippitt S, Wise J, Cahill BR, Katch FI. The effects of hydraulic resistance strength training in pre-pubertal males. Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 1986 Dec;18(6):629-38

Bio

Chi L. Chiu (39), M.S. is a rehab clinician, personal trainer, vitality coach, educator and presenter. He is the founder and director of Chivo physiotherapy, Chivo vitality coaching and Chivo education, a continuous professional development (CPD) center, specialized in courses medical fitness and lifestyle management. All his courses are accredited by the Dutch associations of physiotherapy, dietitians and personal trainers. He holds a degree in nutrition and one in health sciences and is currently working on his master (last one!) in psychology. He loves learning and spends 50 days a year on seminars, courses, conventions, etc. His approach is always holistic, which means he will include nutritional, physical and psychological interventions when appropriate. He is a consultant for sports coaches on a variety of topics and is assistant coach in little league for fun. He is not a typical strength coach, but his ‘I don’t like sports, I like results’ philosophy, keeps him close to elite level sports, where failure is not an option. He does not maintain a blog, but he posts regularly on his facebook page and welcomes you to join.

Mike and I discussed:

• Soft tissue therapy and massage
• Breathing and the diaphragm
• Fascial line considerations in training
• Some of the mistakes I have made in my career

Hope you ENJOY IT!

Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com

In this video, I offer two techniques for addressing the erector spinae musculature (which act as a force couple with the hip flexors in an anterior tilt). These techniques require the client to be active during the treatment process, which helps them to learn what it feels like to move their pelvis between both anterior and posterior pelvic tilts.

Being able to both anteriorly and posteriorly tilt the pelvis is an essential component of the golf swing and is tested during the “pelvic tilt test” in the Titleist Performance Institute Golf Fitness Assessment.  You may observe many clients who are unable to move out of anterior pelvic tilt, or if they are they do so with what Dr. Greg Rose refers to as a “shake and bake”, where you see their body actually shake as the muscles try and allow this movement to happen.

Hopefully you find these techniques useful!

Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com

I have had the pleasure of corresponding with Dave through Mike Boyle’s strengthcoach.com and have found Dave to be an excellent resource for training information.  He brings a very well rounded approach to Strength and Conditioning, two terms that probably don’t justify what he does as a coach, as his programs are highly specific and take into account the importance of individuality with each athlete.

In this interview we covered topics like:

• Dave’s philosophy on training soccer athletes
   
• The importance of aerobic work for soccer players and understanding the specific alactic/aerobic needs of these athletes
   
• Issues with relying solely on high-intensity interval training in your program
   
• Use of the Omega Wave to objectify recovery following competition
   
• Ideas on recovery strategies for the athletes
   

The interview is a little long, but the content is very rich and I am excited to present it too you.

Hope you enjoy it!

Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com

–

1) Dave, thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule to do this interview. Can you briefly give the readers a little bit of background on yourself, as well as your overall philosophy for preparing soccer athletes?

I came into the profession of fitness (strength & conditioning, or whatever you want to call our profession today) after both playing and coaching soccer, which I believe gives me a different philosophy and perspective from many performance coaches. After an eight year, undistinguished and mediocre professional playing career (2 years in the German minor leagues and 6 years in professional indoors), I ended up finishing my bachelors (Coaching Science) at George Mason University and went into the graduate program (Exercise Science) there while working with both soccer programs. While coaching at Mason and doing the youth soccer circuit, I had the opportunity to participate in a UEFA/European ‘A’ license soccer coaching course in the Czech Republic in 2004. The 5-week course was conducted at Charles University in Prague, and, besides teaching a variety of coaching methodologies, it was also highly scientific, and was a fantastic introduction to the Eastern European perspective on performance enhancement. Following this course I “transitioned” to the title of fitness coach for the George Mason men’s and women’s soccer programs, as well as the Washington Freedom women’s team (currently a WPS franchise). Currently, I am the fitness coach for the Seattle Sounders FC (MLS), and will be finishing my fourth year in the league (’07 & ’08 in Kansas City).

Regarding my philosophy of preparing soccer athletes, I would say that 80% of the work I would do is fairly specific. It’s funny that a lot of people think of “sports-specific”, and they think of doing something in a weight room, that may mimic the movement patterns of the sport. I am a strong believer in soccer-specific training, meaning that the athletes spend most of their time on the field, with the proper footwear, using a ball. I think the best way to do a majority of fitness work is to utilize different game forms to train the aerobic or anaerobic systems in a game-related manner. However, I also believe there are crucial components that make up final 20% of work that needs to be done which are outside the playing field. I think maximum strength work is important in the off-season, as well as work in the gym aimed at targeting the alactic and oxidative systems. In our league, it’s very difficult to make strength gains in season, but our aim is to maintain strength, and do any necessary stability and corrective work that may prevent injuries.

What I am looking at this year, as my philosophy “evolves”, is getting that balance right between the 80% specific work vs. the 20% non-specific work. We have started to see with this group in Seattle, as we get into a lot of games, and end up in a weekly rhythm of game-recovery training-pregame training-game, etc. we actually end up seeing a drop in fitness levels slowly over a 4-6 week period. This is the case especially with our less fit players. Is it because the load of the game is not strong enough to stimulate fitness gains (maybe the less fit players play more conservatively), or is it that the oxidative or glycolytic systems aren’t really fully recovered before having to play in the next game? I think this speaks for the importance of that 20% of non-specific work that seems to fall by the wayside with so congested playing schedule.

2) There has been a lot of discussion lately about aerobic training. Soccer is a sport of short intense bursts followed by periods of recovery (jogging, moving into position, etc). Many want to just do intense interval training and forget about the importance of total energy system development. Can you please talk a little bit about the energy system development work you do with the Seattle Sounders, and how it fits into the overall training program?

Well, first we’ll need to come to the agreement that soccer is an alactic-aerobic dominant sport. Meaning that the typical movement profile within a match involves a player making, on average, a 20-meter sprint every 30-90sec over the course of a 90-minute match. Depending on the position, players will make approximately 50-80 sprints in the game, and yet cover 10-14km (check research by Thomas Reilly, Jens Bangsbo, or Raymond Verheijen for more specifics). So, we could then assume that most intense actions are short enough that the energy required can be fulfilled by the alactic system, and the resting intervals should be enough time that the oxidative system aids the replenishment of ATP for the alactic system. So, if I come to this conclusion about the sport of soccer, then what role would anaerobic (lactic) intervals have within my program? Why would I want to train my system to create large amounts of lactic energy?

I don’t want to totally minimize the importance of the lactic system, however, in energy production within a game. There will be periods of time that a player’s alactic system is not fully recovered, or that the required workload becomes too high, and an athlete will need to fall back on his/her lactic system to provide energy. However, it appears that an over-reliance on lactic energy can be very taxing on the body, and is not efficient.

I made an interesting observation last year when Seattle was lucky enough to play summer exhibition matches against world-class club teams FC Barcelona and Chelsea FC. Watching someone like Lionel Messi play, arguably the best player in the world now, or Drogba and Anelka at Chelsea, it was pretty clear that the higher the level of play becomes, the more alactic-aerobic it is. Messiwould stand right in front of us, and float slowly across the field, until BANG, at the right time, he would take off like a 100m sprinter, to look to get the ball behind the defense. After his run, he would continue to float and probe until the next opening came. His play couldn’t be any more alactic-aerobic. If you watch a typical average level US college soccer game though, you will see a frantic paced game, that probably borders more on a alactic-lactic type sport at times, where the goal is to keep this non-stop pace up until the coach substitutes player out (only 3 subs are permitted in pro or international soccer) to replace them with fresher players who can maintain this frantic pace. The higher the level of play, the more alactic-aerobic the game becomes, probably because of how well pro players control the ball, as well as because of how well conditioned most are.

To me, this is more justification to train sport-specifically. Use the ball and training games, vary durations of work, and modify the size, shape of your field to train the energy systems you want. We have found that playing 5 against 5 type exercises on slightly large fields will elicit HR ranges in the 90-95% zone fairly easily. We can then program 4-8min “aerobic power” type games to stimulate pretty significant aerobic adaptations. Look at any research done by Hoff, Helgerud, & Wisløff out of Norway, andyou will find some pretty compelling data on the aerobic adaptations that can take place with this type of specific work.

The biggest mistake that coaches make, however, is the lack of ability to program the alactic training effectively. I was lucky enough to see several great examples of this in the Czech Republic, where they are masters of it. It’s important to create different 1v1 or 2v2 exercises where players are asked to work maximally for 6-20sec, but then given about a minute of rest before they go again, to truly overload alactic capacity in the right way (6-12sec work, work:rest 1:8-10). Alactic capacity is fairly genetic, and difficult to influence, which means that training sessions to target it, must be right on. Typically, coaches will not give enough rest, and it soon becomes more of a lactic power exercise (20-30sec work, with a work:rest of 1:3). What coaches don’t understand, is that, if the work part over 6-12sec is truly maximal, then the proper rest period will also train the oxidative system to recover effectively as well. I have also found that hill sprints and sled pushes over this same work and rest scheme also help to create adaptations that improve “soccer-specific” performance pretty significantly as well. This sled and hill work can become an important part of that “non-specific 20%” programming.

Beyond the scope of soccer training, just when looking at “interval training”, I think it’s prudent to really investigate whether someone is talking about sprint interval work (SIT), or high-intensity interval work (HIIT). SIT would appear to target the alactic and aerobic systems pretty well (6-10 sec work, >40 sec rest), while HIIT work (longer duration of work, less rest) would seem to target the lactic system more. So, coaches just need to be clear that these two types of intervals will elicit different types of adaptations over time. There are a lot of younger American players now that come into our league who have clearly trained almost exclusively with HIIT methods of conditioning training. My experience is that some of these athletes don’t make it because they are losing that “pop” or that sharpness. We recently had a high draft pick player who could do 300yd shuttles the entire day, and not fatigue. But he never seemed like he could be explosive. At the same time, we had an older European ex-World Cup player, who was heavily reliant on his speed for his style of play. When we would do plyos, this older European player would be exhausted after doing eight high hurdle jumps. His work was visibly maximal. This college players would jump over the
eight hurdles (not visibly maximal), jog back and be ready to do it again. I tried and tried to get him to do things more explosively, but it seemed to be difficult to change. Slowly, I came to the realization that with our over reliance on HIIT work, we may be creating a culture of athletes who can do things at 90% speed all day, but can’t do things maximally when they need to.

3) I know you guys are using the Omega Wave with your athletes. Can you talk about how you are using the Omega Wave and how it helps you dictate the training program for individual athletes?

For those of you who don’t know, OmegaWave is a non-invasive assessment tool, used to measure the readiness and level of optimization of all of the functional systems of the body, prior to a training day or week. The athlete wears a series of electrodes (including EKG), and the OmegaWavedevice measures over a five-minute period: HRV, metabolic capacities (DiffECG), and neuromuscular fatigue (Omega potential). The data from the assessment are immediately available after completion of the test.

We typically test all players who started a match the morning of the first recovery session following a game. This assessment then gives us a snap shot of where each player is at in terms of fatigue. Not just the level of fatigue, but more important, we get an indication of which specific system may be the “weak link” for that week. For example, we have some “sprinter” type players who experience a lowered Omega potential implying a certain level of CNS/neuromuscular fatigue after every match. It could be 48 more hours until that athlete can really gain any adaptation from speed or power work.

The biggest area we use it for is to look at HRV, and which players become more sympathetic (SNS) or parasympathetic (PSNS) dominant during their recovery phase. Athletes who become more sympathetically dominant eventually have a significantly higher risk of muscle injury over time, per my observations this year. It’s actually been possible to predict most of our muscle injuries this year through OmegaWave. The issue at the professional team level is determining as a staff how to modify an individual’s training load within a team setting to prevent an injury from then occurring.

The alternate danger group distinguished through HRV, are those athletes who become overly parasympathetic over time. My experience this year has shown that soccer players with a strong glycolytic make-up, with concurrently lower oxidative capacities, are far more likely to have strong parasympathetic dominance in their recovery phase. As a result, such athletes seems to have the sensation of “shutting down” – they experience lowered RHR, can be a little sluggish in training, and show signs on their OW assessment of hypothyroid function and lowered hormonal output. We have 3-4 players in this category, and they are really good with following the protocol we’ve set up for this (after consultation with Val Nasedkin and Joel Jamieson) involving contrast recovery work, some specific high-resistance bike intervals, and nutrition modifications. According to the Russian designers of OmegaWave, athletes who are “slightly” parasympathetic are said to be an optimal state, but these athletes end up being significantly parasympathetic dominant.

Finally, the metabolic assessment on the OW gives us feedback on the oxidative, lactic, and alactic capacities of the athlete, as well as concurrent physiological markers such as AT, RHR, VO2max. What these all do is give us insight into the long-term adaptations to our training program. Val Nasedkin, the Russian designer of OW, thinks that most training adaptations in team sports should be aimed at improving oxidative abilities. I would have to agree in the respect that our players with huge “lactic” engines are able to cover a lot of ground in a match. But there fatigue is deeper and far more severe (typically very parasympathetic), and they take longer to recover from games. Verkhoshansky methodology, laid out in Block Training System in Endurance Running seems to support Nasedkin’s belief as well. He continues to stress how important the decrease in blood lactate accumulation is for improved performance. As a result, the aim of Verkhoshanksy methods were to train to improve the oxidative capacity of both slow and fast twitch fibers through the increase of mitochondrial density.

At the end of the day, it would appear that metabolically, it may just be important for you to have at least one big engine, whether it be the lactic or oxidative. Since we are always getting new players in, it’s important to remember that these metabolic adaptations are very long-term types of adaptations. With OW, it’s easy to note the genetic tendencies of athletes to rely on one system or another. It’s also fairly easy then, with this metabolic assessment tool, to see which athlete’s systems (lactic, oxidative, or alactic) respond quicker to training. We have some speed/power players with us that take forever to make decent aerobic/oxidative adaptations, because that’s just not how they are genetically wired. This allows us to see that, and by patient with such an athlete.

4) Recovery is an essential component for athletes between training, competition, and travel. Can you speak to the recovery strategies that you have in place with the Sounders?

Beyond some of the ideas above regarding recovery, there are some other different things that we do. At this point in the season, we have about three games per week. If we have less than three days before the next game, then our players will do a “non-impact” recovery, which will involve 20 minutes on a spin bike, followed foam rolling, stretching, plus some mobility and stability exercises. With so little time to do strength training at this time in the season, we also need to add in some core, upper-body, and body weight strength work on this day. The biggest issue we have in this sport regarding training programs and recovery work is the decision of how much specific work to do the 2nd day after a game. Many soccer coaches want to begin to do a lot of field work again, thinking that the players have already had one day off, but I have found that typically, players are still in a pretty fatigued state still 36 hours after a match.

We also have a full time massage therapist, who will work with different players over the course of the week. We are lucky that our medical staff consists of a physical therapist (head trainer), an ATC, and massage therapist, so our athletes are well cared for. I have also brought in an assistant, Jordan Webb, who is certified in PRI (Postural Restoration), to be able to monitor movement dysfunction that we may need to address in different individuals over the course of the season.

5) Thanks for the great interview, Dave. I am sure the readers appreciate the information you have shared with us today. Can you please tell everyone about anything you have coming up in the future (projects, lectures, etc)?

Well, we will be flying around 20,000 miles in the next two months playing in various places through North & Central America, so the best chance you’ll have to see me is in the airport!! I was just interviewed by Anthony Renna for the StrengthCoach podcast, so that should be up on iTunes soon. The only other lecture activity I really have is at the MLS Athletic Trainers Conference, which runs concurrently with the MLS Combine, in January in Miami. I will be doing a presentation on how we are utilizing OmegaWave as a tool to prevent injuries.

Thanks for the opportunity for the interview Patrick, and keep up the good work!!

As I stated in previous articles, as coaches we have become very good at applying the stress.  We can take the athlete out and run them, make them lift heavy, throw medicine balls, do circuits, do intervals, etc., however, we often overlook the restorative aspect in our training programs.  No program is a good program if you cannot recover from it.  One of the ways that I have found soft tissue therapy to be of extreme value is its use in restoration and recovery.  It is one way in which we can help the athlete relax and calm down following intense bouts of work and stress (training, competition, etc).

Some athletes will require more recovery between intense periods of training/competition than others, making it important to understand your athletes and how they respond to these situations so that you can adjust training accordingly.  Using some form of soft tissue therapy/bodywork is one method that can be helpful in bringing the athlete back to a parasympathetic state.  A number of papers have looked at changes in HRV following a few different types of massage techniques – trigger point therapy, rolfing, joint manipulation, and thai massage.  In all instances, massage helped to increase HRV, indicating a move towards a parasympathetic state.

While the changes in HRV, enhanced parasypathetic state, and overall psychological well-being are impressive, many of these studies are not conducted in conjunction with exercise.  However, one study conducted by Arroyo-Morales et al, looked at the effects of 40min. of myofascial release work compared to placebo (sham ultrasound) following three 30-second Wingate tests (high intensity exercise).  Interestingly enough, those in the massage/myofascial release group actually had better recovery in HRV and blood pressure compared to the placebo group.  Those in the massage group recovered their HRV and blood pressure back to baseline/pre-exercise levels.

Practical Application

As noted above, knowing your athletes and when they need a “recovery day” is important for enhancing their development and avoiding overtraining.  One thing that I have noticed in athletes that are in a more sympathetic or under-recovered state is that their skin is a little more tight/taught when I try and move it, compress it, or roll it.  Additionally, there are other changes in the skin and muscle that may be interpreted as an increased sympathetic state:

• Goosebumps when skin rolling techniques or pressure is applied

 

• Inability to relax when pressure is applied (often times going into an upper chest breathing pattern or being very guarded)

 

• Some have suggested that being ticklish is a sign of an overly sympathetic state (especially if it happens on one side of the body and not the other)

 

• Extreme soreness or tenderness with light pressure

From a practical standpoint, when athletes are in this sort of sympathetic state, it is necessary to be patient with your soft tissue therapy and be aware of how the athlete is responding to the treatment.  Being to aggressive in times like this or trying to ”work deep” to quickly (not patiently waiting for their body to make the changes that allow you to work into deeper layers) may lead to a less than desirable result, as it is important to keep in mind that soft tissue therapy can also be thought of as a stress that ones needs to recover from.

Trying to get the athlete to relax and get comfortable is an important goal to have in these times, as these circumstances differ slightly from doing soft tissue therapy for a specific injury or painful movement pattern.  I often think of it as successful if I can get the athlete to nod-off a little bit on the table and get “sleepy”.  Because the parasympathetic nervous system is thought of as the “rest and digest” portion of our autonomic nervous system, eliciting a more rest-full/sleepy state is a good goal to have.  My colleague, physiotherapist Willem Kramer, has stated before that “a little bit of pain can be a gateway into the parasypathetic nervous system”.  What Willem means by this is a little bit of the good pain – you know, the “it hurts so good” stuff – can help to fatigue the athlete or make them a little bit tired (sort of like what happens when you sit in the sun all day and get sleepy).  Willem states that a goal is to try and get the athlete to fall asleep on your table, as he interprets this as helping push them into a parasypathetic state and increasing healing (Willem, is talking about more “treatment” based soft tissue/manual therapy here, where you are dealing with a specific injury).

Acknowledging the recovery aspect of your training program and being aware of your athlete’s physical and mental state is an important part of a well-rounded training program.  Massage therapy is one type of modality that can be used to help improve recovery and increase heart rate variability.

Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com