Unpopular S&C Beliefs

I think in-season, heavy prowler is exactly what most athletes could use (besides sprinters). I use it closer to competition dates in order to still get a good quad exercise in without the soreness that comes along with squats. Typically we will squat on Monday and use the prowler on Wednesday if we compete on Friday & Saturday.
Prowlers are generally very good exercise for the lower body and horizontal force transmission, no doubt. Very heavy prowlers would transfer alright to wrestling I imagine, with it being more velocity specific to that and training neural drive and strength at slower contraction velocities. I know shots can be fast, but there's still more time to apply strength in wrestling as it's more dependent on isometric and maximal strength. Probably helps with the drive too.
 
When you say that you can't make someone more athletic, to which extent and what do you mean exactly? You can't make someone increase their vert, move better, more balanced, more agile? I know some of these might be marginal improved, but they can be improved.

Probably not what the guy you were replying to was thinking of, but I remember reading a very experienced running coach saying "I never saw a slow kid get fast".
 
Sprinting is something that involves a lot of technique. People can get quite a bit faster in 1 day with some proper coaching if they've never received it before.
 
Probably not what the guy you were replying to was thinking of, but I remember reading a very experienced running coach saying "I never saw a slow kid get fast".
I think there's a lot of truth to that. Sure, you can teach someone better mechanics and improve their speed, maybe marginally, but good sprinters are born. That's the same in any other sport, genetics matters a lot. I remember a study from London some years ago with aerobic intervention aimed towards marathon runners. As I recall, 20% were non responders and barely improved their VO2max. I can't seem to find it, but here's an article: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/news/2013/april/58marathon.html

Genes influence on phenotype is not well established, but there is more and more coming out: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23681449
 
Last edited:
Talking about sprinting performance and training got me reading. For anyone interested;

This systematic review exploring different loads of sled resisted sprints vs unresisted sprints is good! https://www.researchgate.net/public...mprove_Sprint_Performance_A_Systematic_Review

This article by Chris Beardsley on strength training for sprinting is solid:https://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/perspectives/strength-training-sprinting/

And this video on biomechanics and drills is high level stuff. Awesome video and what it all comes down to:
 
Last edited:
Probably not what the guy you were replying to was thinking of, but I remember reading a very experienced running coach saying "I never saw a slow kid get fast".

That coach never met a "Herschel Walker". I've met more great athletes who did not have instant success than immediately successful who became great.
 
That coach never met a "Herschel Walker". I've met more great athletes who did not have instant success than immediately successful who became great.
Herschel was always fast. He grew up trying to beat his older sister in footraces. She was an all-American college sprinter.

Strength and skill can be built from humble beginnings, but speed is something you're born with. You refine maybe the last 5% of sprinting speed with practice on technique, strength, flexibility, etc.
 
Probably not what the guy you were replying to was thinking of, but I remember reading a very experienced running coach saying "I never saw a slow kid get fast".

No that 100% applies. I've seen parents throw down thousands upon thousands on "athletic development coaches" who have made their name off of a few pro athletes. Unless their kid is a great athlete, it's typically just blowing money.

My biggest thing is you can always get a weak person considerably strong but a slow person? They're always going to be slow.
 
Herschel was always fast. He grew up trying to beat his older sister in footraces. She was an all-American college sprinter.

Strength and skill can be built from humble beginnings, but speed is something you're born with. You refine maybe the last 5% of sprinting speed with practice on technique, strength, flexibility, etc.


"I was a fat little kid with a speech impediment," Walker told Woodruff. "I used to get beat up, not just picked on."

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=4643971&page=1


Show me a great athlete and I bet they have demons.
 
A lot of great athletes also downplay their physical gifts. You have seen pictures, old and young, of Herschel, have you not?

yes I have and he looked pudgy in elementary school. Have you seen SEC storied?



A lot of great athletes do downplay their gifts but very few ignore early dominance. the thing about sprinting is that very few slow people go out for sprinting so you tend to pick from a fast pool. Do you think the pool is fast in Scotland or Russia? Broyzov and Wells both developed into Olympic podium sprinters and they were not Usain Bolt who was the fastest in every age category he competed from his second year forward.
 
yes I have and he looked pudgy in elementary school. Have you seen SEC storied?



A lot of great athletes do downplay their gifts but very few ignore early dominance. the thing about sprinting is that very few slow people go out for sprinting so you tend to pick from a fast pool. Do you think the pool is fast in Scotland or Russia? Broyzov and Wells both developed into Olympic podium sprinters and they were not Usain Bolt who was the fastest in every age category he competed from his second year forward.


What I'm saying is that if Usain Bolt had a twin brother named Bob who never ran, just sat in the couch playing video games, Bob would probably still smoke 99% of the general public in an impromptu 100m footrace. Sprinting speed is largely genetic.
 
While the genetic component is observably larger, i'm not sold on a roughly %1 trainability factor, particularly when we look at the progression of athletes in throwing sports, which I would classify as primarily speed-dominant.
 
While the genetic component is observably larger, i'm not sold on a roughly %1 trainability factor, particularly when we look at the progression of athletes in throwing sports, which I would classify as primarily speed-dominant.

Power-dominant. And strength, a component of power, can be increased dramatically. And technique figures more prominently in throwing. Even a toddler can sprint.

I'd say (and I've said) about 5% of speed is trained. That's through increases in strength, flexibility, balance, mobility, coordination, form, and technique. The rest, you're both with.

Another way of saying it would be, if there was a spectrum of trainability in sports, sprinting would be at or near the bottom. Stuff like golf, archery, bowling, etc. would be at the top.
 
You can make someone faster. But you won't take someone who wasn't otherwise fast and make them an Olympic sprinter.
 
You can make someone faster. But you won't take someone who wasn't otherwise fast and make them an Olympic sprinter.
This, and in addition, you can make someone faster, but not nearly to the degree that you can make them stronger or better at a certain skill.
 
I remember a watching a kid who was technically proficient at long jump but couldn't jump as far as this other guy who had shitty form. The shitty jumper would make much more progress than the already proficient jumper. Although the proficient jumper would make gains through strength and speed work, etc... the kid with a natural jumping ability would see a much greater improvement, comparatively with skill work alone, and we haven't even talked about adding strength and what speed we can add. Although the proficient jumper really loved the sport, he'll never be as good as the shitty jumper.
 
I remember a watching a kid who was technically proficient at long jump but couldn't jump as far as this other guy who had shitty form. The shitty jumper would make much more progress than the already proficient jumper. Although the proficient jumper would make gains through strength and speed work, etc... the kid with a natural jumping ability would see a much greater improvement, comparatively with skill work alone, and we haven't even talked about adding strength and what speed we can add. Although the proficient jumper really loved the sport, he'll never be as good as the shitty jumper.
I ran track in high school and college, and was primarily a pole vaulter, but did work on sprinting since I ran a few events in occasion. My form coming out of the blocks was good, but my top speed was not on par with the best guys.

Freshman year of college, I was assigned to work with a kid who was the Texas high school champ in the 100m and 200m. His starts were bad. Racing against him, I had him every time for the first 10 yards. But then he'd hit his stride, and bye bye.

He was just a natural. Born fast. With diligent work on his form, we took a few thousandths off his 100m by getting a better start, but it hardly mattered since he was so damn fast anyways.
 
Last edited:
Bench press is, albeit a decent lift, highly overrated, at least in terms of practical application to anything relevant..
Agree strongly with this. Doesn't help that 90% of the people I see doing bench press are doing it with garbage technique
 
Back
Top