2
Forward
Today, there exists an abundance of quality training literature from varyingconstructs of knowledge (i.e. empirical, theoretical & practical), and all have theirplace in time within the “optimal” planning/training for the athlete. The strength andconditioning coach is urged to objectively question whether the means and methodstaken from this literature are congruent with the most important training intention:the athlete’s attainment of sport mastery. The strength and conditioning coach mustalso ensure that the general aspects of physical training create the basis for theperfection of more specific technical-tactical mastery of sport skill, and speed of execution during the competitive exercise (1). This is of even greater significancewith athletes of higher qualification; for aside from the anomaly, the specific abilities,not general, result in progress towards the athlete’s sport mastery and personalperformance. This phenomenon has been recently acknowledged in the research of Dr. Bondarchuk (2), who’s correlate data have pointed out an absent relationship of training transfer between “general” physical exercises and heightened sport form inathletes of high qualification in various athletic events. Therefore, it may seem to beirrational to use these general exercises in an attempt to “directly” manifest sportform. However, this relationship may not be as strong with athletes involved in teamsports, where game results rely more on tactics rather than on weight roommastery, or with athletes of lower qualification, where small broad stimuli provokesufficient adaptation. The scrupulous review of the physical preparationdissimilarities, as they relate to the “on field” sporting results at the High School,Collegiate, Professional or Olympic levels, further reinforces the hypothesis thatgeneral physical preparation serves as a supportive role in the athlete’s sportmastery attainment. It must also be recognized, however, that physical preparationis, in fact, necessary in sport preparation, albeit constrained to certain times withinthe training, and harmonious with all stimuli invoked by the athlete’s preparation. Inthis case, physical preparation, along with all other training, must be monitored andoptimally planned.Especially in contact sport, the idiosyncrasies of injury, rehabilitation and injuryprevention, may also occupy the primary objective of training, depending on thepeculiar state of the sportsman.The title,
strength and conditioning coach
, may prove to be a misnomer, as theresponsibilities of the job must go beyond the scope of what the
title
simply implies.The coach must ensure that any sportsman under his/her guidance receive muchmore than physical development, if that sportsman is to eventually realize his/herpotential. The integration of physical, psychological, tactical, and technicalpreparation to suit sportsmen of varying disciplines, of varying levels of preparationand qualification in their process of attaining sport mastery is of primary importancefor any coach, regardless of his or her “formal” title. With this said, all coaches mustcollaborate when implementing and monitoring their athlete’s training.It is imperative that any coach carry out continued examination of the sportsmanunder his care with careful, critical attention being placed on the training process inits organic whole. “Control over the course of training can only be effective if onecarries-out regular observations of the dynamics of the sportsman’s state” (1).Conclusions may be formulated, or solutions to various training problems can bepostulated, based on the resultant outcomes of how the team and/or individualathletes react to the training methodic(s). This objective scrutiny may steer thecoach away from the, “I do what was done in the past” mentality, which forgoes any
Leave a Comment