Functional Swimming Warm-up

Functional swimming warm-ups can aide warm-up at crowded swimming pools during large competitions. I'll never forget my first US Open competition in Long Island. I was 15-years old, the meet was SCM, and as a 5'8" male I was shaking with nervousness. Worse of all, there was nowhere to warm-up! I could barely do a 50 easy before ten 12 -year old girls were grabbing my feet during my 1:30 warm-up pace!

To combat this lack of warm-up space, my coach and I came up the best solution we could think: static stretch in the shower!

In retrospect, this was potentially the worst warm-up possible, as static stretching directly before a race is believed to impair performance. Unfortunately, this practice still happens at many crowded meets.

The role of a warm-up is to:

"reduce the disturbance in blood acid-base balance during the swimming exercise. Warm-up was found to be beneficial and not a hindrance to performance. Warm-up swimming can be used for reasons other than performance improvements (e.g., environmental familiarization, injury prevention, psychological focusing, neuromuscular facilitation). If it produces additional physiological benefits then its justification is even further supported (Robergs 2011)".

Even the well respected Lou Sharp suggests the physiological effect of warm-up diminishes 15-20 minutes after it is performed.

However, mimicking the intensity of your swimming race is essential, even when water is absent.  

A proper out of water warm-up is  non-specific, while moving in every plane of motion; most importantly, it must prevent injuries. Secondly, it will dilate arteries for increased blood flow to muscles, and lastly, it enhances specifics for the sport, as improving blood flow, vasodilation, is suggested to improve performance by 7%.

However, excessive warm-up impairs performance up to 5 seconds in the 100. However, excessive for one may be just right for someone else, making this process more subjective than scientists enjoy.

As Robergs stated, in swimming, getting in the water to regain feel is important, but some situations are less than ideal; especially if the swimmer is only able to move at a snail's pace in the warm-up pool. Mimicking the neural demands of swimming outside is impossible, but vasodilation, injury prevention, and intensity matching are possible.

You will never find a research study outlining a proper out of water warm-up. However, knowing the research on warm-up and applying this research to your knowledge on swimming, it is possible to create an ideal out of water warm-up appropriate for your needs.

If you are looking for an out of water warm-up to do at overcrowded meets, interested at the idea of reducing the amount of “non-race pace” swimming due to motor control theory, or looking for a method to help reduce injuries, then an out of water-up may be an option for you. Therefore, an out of water warm-up, prior to the swimming warm-up is likely the best mode for overall success. To reiterate, swimming is the best mode for swimming warm-up, however if you want to prevent injuries in combination of warming-up or if you don’t have space, try this out of water warm-up outline:
 

• 5 Minutes of multi-planar dynamic jogging (forward and backwards, side-steps, cross-braiding, etc.) to induce vasodilation.
• Shoulder blade stabilization, core stabilization, and dynamic mobility exercises for injury prevention.

After this, hop on the block and do a few race pace dives and I think you'll be happily surprised with the results. If plan on implementing this at a meet, make sure to practice this new routine before the competition, tweaking it as necessary to optimize it for your personal physiology.

Summary
Remember, evidence-based coaching is the unison of personal experience and research. Unite these two realms for optimization for each individual. This is likely the best route of success, as one size fits none.

By G. John Mullen founder of the Center of Optimal Restoration, head strength coach at Santa Clara Swim Club, creator of the Swimmer's Shoulder System, and chief editor of the Swimming Science Research Review.

Continue Reading

Stretching Impairs Sprinting Performance

Background
Stretching is common prior to athletic performance despite the common thought that stretching immediately prior to sprint exercise impairs performance. Many of these programs utilize hamstring and other hip extension muscles, despite the idea that hip flexion is the main motion in sprint running. In fact, the iliopsoas (IP) demonstrated higher muscle activation in sprint running compared to the other hip muscles (Yokozowa 2007).

“Given the relative controversy and paucity of literature in this area of study, it was the purpose of this study to examine the effects of acute static, dynamic, and ballistic stretching, and no stretching of the IP on 40-yard sprint times in 18-37 year-old noncompetitive, recreational runners (Wallmann 2012)”.

What was done

Thirty-five subjects performed four different stretching protocols prior to a 40-meter sprint run. Prior to all the running trials, a 5-minute walking warm-up was performed. Following the 5-minute warm-up, the following four conditions were randomly chosen:  

1. no stretch (NS) 
2. ballistic stretch (BS) 
3. static stretch (SS) 
4. dynamic stretch (DS) 

Each condition was performed for one minute, then one minute following the stretching a maximal 40-meter run was performed.

Results
There was a significant difference between pre- and post-stretch times in the NS group, suggesting this group had the greatest improvement compared to the other trials which showed no significant improvement.

Discussion

The main finding in this study was that SS did not negatively influence sprint running time, while NS did significantly improve running time. This improvement may have occurred as the initial sprint run trial may have existed as a warm-up. Another potential reason for improvement in the NS group is that the NS group did not perform any activity which negatively influences the tendon stiffness which is associated with sprint running success. A stiffer muscle is thought to produce more force as since a longer tendon may have increased slack and less force production after stretching.

Practical Implications

Despite the limitations of analyzing untrained runners in a distance much shorter than any competitive swimming race, this evidence adds more evidence against using SS directly before sprint races. Interestingly, it may suggest not using any stretching protocol, as NS demonstrated the best results. However, more direct studies on swimming and swimming specific muscles are necessary for specific guidelines, but until this time the research continues to confirm that it’s best to not perform SS directly prior to sprint racing.

Related Reading

Interview with Dr. Wallmann

Reference

Wallmann HW, Christensen SD, Perry C, Hoover DL. The acute effects of various types of stretching static, dynamic, ballistic, and no stretch of the iliopsoas on 40-yard sprint times in recreational runners. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Oct;7(5):540-7.

Swimming Science Research Review 

This is a piece of the Swimming Science Research Review. Read Swimming Science Research Review November 2012 for a complete list of the articles reviewed.

Sign-up here to receive this month's edition and all future publications for only $10/month. Each edition covers articles ranging from biomechaincs, physiology, rehabilitation, genetic, and much more! These reviews explain the latest sports science research in straightforward language.

This will help you apply knowledge in the review to the pool deck, separating yourself from your peers!

And don’t worry, there’s no fixed commitment period, so if you don’t want to continue receiving the monthly publication, you can just cancel your payment whenever you want.

$10/month

Continue Reading

Choosing Repetitions for Dryland

Last week Dr. John covered the critical point of regressions and progressions (Dryland Mistake: Exercise Progressions and Regressions). Choosing the most effective exercise often depends on how many repetitions one can perform. In this post we’ll cover variables coaches must consider in choosing repetition schemes. There is no single best repetition scheme, but repetitions must always align with goals for the workout and athlete capabilities.

The first consideration is technique. For some exercises, you simply put less weight on the bar if unable to achieve target repetitions. For other technique intensive moves such as pushups, you either need a regression exercise or be willing to perform very low rep sets (1-3). If technique is a challenge, it means you’re still in a learning phase for that exercise and less concerned with conditioning.

Choosing fewer repetitions doesn’t automatically require a reduction in overall workout volume. In the water, distance swimmers regularly swim 25, 50s, 75, or 100yd repeats. We break swim workouts into shorter reps because we know that technical quality (and perhaps mental focus) typically deteriorates if we only did straight distance swims. However, with shorter repetitions we can still accomplish the same overall volume but while preserving technical quality. Same concept applies with rep schemes on dryland.

Energy systems are another consideration in choosing repetition schemes. Traditional thought says swimmers should train the energy systems most used in swimming. However, modern thinking has a greater appreciation for energy systems NOT fully addressed in the sport. For swimming, this would mean greater emphasis on creatine phosphate, or alternatively, not even challenging energy systems at all if performing restorative dryland.

Many coaches and athletes default to higher repetitions and lesser weight thinking that heavier weight might build bulk. Its counterintuitive, but the customary 10-15 reps with short rest is actually the perfect recipe for muscle building. Performing fewer reps but with higher weight is actually less stimulus for hypertrophy, as the primary stimulus is upon neural drive.

Repetitions and regressions/progressions also are functions of how much weight is on the bar. One reason to select more weight and fewer repetitions is there are fewer ways to incorrectly lift a heavy weight than a light weight. Watch someone deadlift or do kettlebell swings with a ten pound weight and you’ll see all kinds of sloppy variations. Performing few reps with a heavier weight in certain exercises limits the available strategies one can use to move the load. (see, Maximal Force Production for Reducing Injuries) Going heavier is a big leap of faith for many (after all we’re constantly hammering the point of “do no harm” in the weight room), but this can easily be accommodated with proper exercise selection via progressions and regressions.

Finally, speed is an overlooked yet vital component of choosing repetition volume. Maybe you complete all the reps, but set becomes a grind. Though few weight rooms are equipped with bar speed monitors, qualitative observation can often detect speed loss. Remembering that power output is a function of strength and speed, recognize that you may spend the latter part of the set training at a lower power output if you lose “bar speed”.
It is obvious that power output would decrease if you swam the second 50yds of a 100yd event eight seconds slower than the first 50yds; the same concept applies if you grind through the last few reps of an exercise at a significantly slower pace than when you started. There are some exercises where speed is not important (isometrics, loaded carries) but when speed is important, select repetition quantities that allow the athlete to maintain speed through the set as this will sustain power output. 

Conclusion
This may read like a case for doing fewer reps, but the most important factor is picking the optimal reps for your stated goals. Choosing fewer repetitions with heavier loads challenges neural drive, whereas higher rep schemes develop hypertrophy or muscular endurance. There’s nothing wrong with performing high volume workouts, but ensure that rep schemes align with your goals and that technique is never sacrificed.

By Allan Phillips. Allan and his wife Katherine are heavily involved in the strength and conditioning community, for more information refer to Pike Athletics.  

Continue Reading

Weekly Round-up

1. Chronic High Dose BCAA Supplementation Reduces Endurance Performance by 43% Plus: How Ammonia, Glutamine, Arginine & Low Carb Could be Involved
2. Suck-Swallow-Breathe: The Origins of Advanced Motor Control
3. "Just One More Set" (1/2): Metabolic Response to 10,000kg vs. 20,000kg Regimen. EPOC: Do Reps and Loads Both Figure? And What About Elite Athletes Do They Need More?
4. Massage and Stress-Related Symptoms

Continue Reading

Friday Interview: Dr. Harvey Wallmann

1. Please introduce yourself to the readers (how you started in the profession, education, credentials, experience, etc.).
My name is Harvey Wallmann and I am currently the Director of the Doctor of Physical Therapy Program at Western Kentucky University. I began my physical therapy teaching career at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), in Las Vegas, NV in 1997 where I was founding Director of the Program.

My prior credentials include a BA in Movement and Sports Science and an MS in Exercise Physiology, both from Purdue University. I graduated with an MS PT degree from the University of Indianapolis, Krannert Graduate School of Physical Therapy in 1989 and a Doctor of Science (DSc) from Loma Linda University in 2000. I also hold certifications as a Certified Athletic Trainer (ATC) and a Certified Strength Conditioning Specialist (CSCS). Additionally, I am a Board Certified Clinical Specialist in Sports Physical Therapy (SCS) and practice in orthopaedic and sports settings as time permits as well as perform occasional pro bono work.

I have collaborated with researchers from many disciplines besides physical therapy, including nursing, kinesiology, athletic training, engineering, and nutrition. Currently, I have over 50 publications, including peer-reviewed articles and book chapters as well as dozens of poster and platform presentations and abstracts. Most of my research focuses on the areas of balance, gait training, and the effects of stretching on human performance. I also serve as the associate editor for North America for the international journal Physical Therapy in Sport, and have reviewed numerous books and manuscripts.

2. Could you briefly describe the findings from your recently published article on stretching?
The purpose of the study was to examine the acute effects of various types of stretching conditions (ballistic, dynamic, static, and no stretch) of the iliopsoas muscle on 40-yard sprint times in recreational runners. We found that the static stretching condition did not adversely affect performance nor were there significant changes in pre-post sprint times in the ballistic or dynamic stretching conditions. However, we did observe a significant improvement in time from pre- to post-condition in the no stretch condition. We determined that the study supported other studies found in the literature regarding no effects of acute static stretching immediately prior to sprint performance, but it appeared to contradict other studies where static stretching was shown to adversely affect sprint times. Since all groups in our study performed an initial baseline sprint, we determined that the baseline 40-yard sprint may have been enough to facilitate performance enhancement, thereby improving the post no stretch condition sprint time. This suggests that 40-yard sprint performance may show greatest improvement without stretching and generalized performance of a sprinting task consistent with the pre-test.

3. Do you feel stretching has similar effects on endurance exercise?
I think the jury is still out on this question. There is some research that suggests that stretching before an endurance event may lower endurance performance and increase the energy cost of running. On the other hand, other findings suggest that dynamic stretching does not affect running endurance performance in trained male or women runners or even cycling performance. Other research involving the effects of stretching on muscular endurance suggests that a stretching protocol can influence bench press endurance. However, a low volume of static stretching does not seem to have a significant effect on muscular endurance.

4. Do you feel these results would be consistent across all muscles? Specifically, what are your thoughts on stretching prime movers vs. stabilizers?
My thinking is that it would affect mainly the prime movers, but there doesn't appear to be a lot of research separating these concepts. However, the research that has been done has shown that static stretching doesn't seem to impede dynamic stability of joints about which stretched muscles cross during functional sports movements. There are several variables to consider, however, especially when considering the type of stretch and the length of time between stretches and the actual performance.

5. The field of stretching in mobility is quite convoluted, are there any concrete definitions on static and dynamic stretching?
Static stretching allows one to sustain a controlled stretch by placing a muscle in a fully elongated position and holding that position for a period of time. A passive static stretch implies that the force is applied externally (i.e., with a partner or gravity-assisted). If an opposing muscle action is used to aid the stretch, then the stretch is called an active static stretch.

With dynamic stretching, muscular contraction is used to stretch a muscle; the effect is to increase or decrease the joint angle where the muscle crosses, thereby elongating the musculotendinous unit as the end range of motion is obtained. What sets dynamic stretching apart is that it uses activity-specific movements, thereby preparing the muscles by taking them through the movements used in a particular sport. An example of this would be a sprinter who would walk using exaggerated long strides, thus emphasizing hip flexion and extension. This subsequently actively contracts and stretches the muscles used by the sprinter, namely the hip flexors and extensors. Dynamic stretching does not incorporate end range ballistic movements that are bouncy or jerky in nature. Rather, all movements are under control.

6. In any field there are few things which are "absolutes," what do you feel is certain in the field of stretching?
As you mentioned, there are very few absolutes; however, I would venture to say that, when stretching, an individual is better off to use stretching within a warm-up program and combine it with a dynamic-type of exercise than to just stretch and try to perform a maximal effort activity.

7. What projects/research should we anticipate from you in the future?
Regarding stretching, I have a research article coming out in print soon involving the acute effects of static stretching on balance in young versus elderly adults. This study investigated the effects of stretching of the gastrocnemius muscle on dynamic balance (limits of stability) in young and old individuals. We found that stretching had no effect on balance, except endpoint excursion, meaning that older people could not lean as far forward (indicating that dynamic balance decreases with age). Another study that I'm working on involves the effect of fatigue of the ankle plantarflexors on sensory organization and limits of stability in a healthy, elderly population.

The following articles will be coming out in print next year:

1. Neelly K, Wallmann HW, Backus C. Validity of Measuring Leg Length with Tape Measure Compared to CT Scan. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice. Accepted.
2. Delgado T, Kubera-Shelton E, Robb R, Hickman R, Wallmann HW, Dufek J. Effects of footstrike on low back posture, shock attenuation, and comfort. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. DOI:10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182781b2c.
3. Wallmann HW, Player KR, Bugnet, M. Acute Effects of Static Stretching on Balance in Young versus Elderly Adults. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics. DOI: 10.3109/02703181.2012.719076.
4. Wallmann HW, Evans NS, Day C, Neelly KR. Interrater Reliability of the Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand Test. Home Health Care Management & Practice. DOI: 10.1177/1084822312453047.

I hope that helps. Thanks for the opportunity to share with your readers.
 
Thanks Dr. Wallmann!

Continue Reading

Dryland Mistake: Exercise Progressions and Regressions

Push-ups, planks, and squats are a few of the most common exercises utilized in dry-land. Everyone has their own philosophy and belief pertaining to dry-land and swimming, but almost everyone agrees appropriate exercises (proper form, volume, rationale) on land can benefit swimmers. For a team to prescribe safe and appropriate exercises (whether for injury prevention or swimming enhancement), progressions and regressions are mandatory. Unfortunately, I’ve visited too many swim programs where improper progressions and regressions are provided, especially on these common exercises. Who hasn’t walked on deck and seen a group of swimmers doing “butt-ups” or performing a plank with their hips scraping the floor? What irony to see coaches nitpick the smallest swimming detail, only to permit atrocious dry-land exercise technique! This form of training is neither beneficial or safe.

A few studies on dry-land suggest dry-land is the most common mode of injury for college swimmers (estimated between 38-44%). Injuries are going to happen, but it is the role of the coach (swimming and dry-land) to keep the swimmer safe during dry-land. If they are increasing their risk of injury, the program was likely inappropriate for the swimmer.

Many elite swimmers are novices on land, making dry-land activities a risk for injury if proper form is not maintained. This makes the importance of finding exercises appropriate for each swimmer important, especially in a large group. Volume is also an issue on many teams. It is all too common to see a swimmer perform 2 perfect form push-ups, followed by 50 bad push-ups. If you can only perform 2 push-ups, start there and perform multiple sets of 2 repetitions! Some think doing excessive volumes help build “mental toughness”, but this must outcome must not put the swimmer at risk for injury inside or outside of the pool.

I’ve seen too many clubs have 8-year olds perform push-ups where 1% of them are doing it properly! Push-ups (in my opinion) are a great exercise for developing shoulder strength, IF DONE PROPERLY! Unfortunately, swim coaches have not been provided, or don’t care to learn, the proper education for progressing and regressing exercises. Simply put, giving an ectomorphic 8-year old a 50 push-ups is like having them do 200s fly, you’re only going to make them hate it and perform it improperly. Moreover, if a few talented kids get away with doing something, doesn’t make it appropriate for the whole group.

To combat this atrocity in the sport, it is essential to not be overconfident, but be realistic in your knowledge base and skills. Don’t hesitate to ask questions, take courses, get help, and refer swimmers to other professionals. I know this thought is disconcerting as many coaches like being control freaks (this is a good trait, it shows you care), but finding a support staff to help enhance your team is essential (read 6 Reasons Why your Team Needs a Strength Coach). If you do not know a simple 5-step progression for each exercise you're suggesting, then it is likely your dry-land is not ideal for the majority of your swimmers. It might mean more work in the short term to find progressions for every exercise, but fewer injuries and more confident swimmers will make the investment worthwhile. Your athletes (and their parents!) will thank you!

References:

1. Wolf BR, Ebinger AE, Lawler MP, Britton CL. Injury patterns in Division I collegiate swimming. Am J Sports Med. 2009 Oct;37(10):2037-42. Epub 2009 Jul 24.
2. McFarland EG, Wasik M. Injuries in female collegiate swimmers due to swimming and cross training. Clin J Sport Med. 1996 Jul;6(3):178-82.

By G. John Mullen founder of the Center of Optimal Restoration, head strength coach at Santa Clara Swim Club, creator of the Swimmer's Shoulder System, and chief editor of the Swimming Science Research Review.

Continue Reading

November Swimming Science Research Review

The fourth edition of the Swimming Science Research Review was released November 15th. Below is the content of this edition. 

Make sure you pick your copy up today to enhance your swimming and evidence-based coaching.  

Does Magnesium Reduce Cramping? | NUTRITION.. 4

Can Spine Manipulation Reduce Low Back Pain? | REHABILITATION.. 5

Effects of Smoking on Knee Tissue | REHABILITATION.. 6

Effects of Vitamin C and E on Training Adaptation  | NUTRITION.. 7

Effects of Rehab Training on Pain Threshold  | REHABILITATION.. 9

Effect of Fatigue on Kinetics  | BIOMECHANICS. 11

Ye Shiwen’s Speedy Swim: Not an Anomaly!  | SWIM STATISTICS. 13

Better Ways to Assess Lower Back Movement  | REHABILITATION.. 14

Cost of treating Lower Back Pain  | REHABILITATION.. 15

Spinal Manipulation Technique Comparison  | REHABILITATION.. 16

ATP Supplement Effects on Muscle Torque/Fatigue  | NUTRITION.. 17

Effects of Different Training Volumes on Strength and Power | STRENGTH TRAINING.. 19

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Treatment and Imaging  | REHABILITATION.. 21

Muscle Fatigue Model for Predicting Muscle Endurance Times  | PHYSIOLOGY. 23

Genetic Variation in Human Muscle Strength  |  GENETICS. 24

Rolling Rhythms in Freestyle- 6 Beat Kick  | SWIM TECHNIQUE. 26

Comparing Effects of Stretching on Sprinting  | DRYLAND.. 28

Knee Stress at Varying Squat Loads/Depths  | DRYLAND
Single Leg Squat Performance Affected by Muscle Activation/ROM | DRYLAND

$10/month

Garrison SR, Allan GM, Sekhon RK, Musini VM, Khan KM. Magnesium for skeletal muscle cramps. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;9:CD009402.

Background
Muscle cramps are common in a wide range of settings, most commonly associated with athletics. Magnesium is one supplement being marketed as a potential treatment, as it is cellular metabolism is commonly associated (anecdotally) as a cause of cramps. This study reviewed the literature on the effectiveness of magnesium to prevent muscle cramps.

What was done

Four studies in older adults and three studies in pregnant women (no studies in athletes) were reviewed.

Results
Cramps in older adults appear unlikely to benefit from magnesium supplement. One study in pregnant women found benefit from supplementation, but the other two studies found no benefit, resulting in inconclusive evidence on the subject.

Discussion
“It is unlikely that magnesium supplementation provides clinically meaningful cramp prophylaxis to older adults experiencing skeletal muscle cramps (Garrison 2012)”. However, inconclusive evidence in pregnant women and lack of research during exercise suggest much more research is necessary on the subject.

Practical Implication

It seems magnesium does not improve cramping in older adults, unfortunately this is difficult to associate with exercise. However, from this reviewer's knowledge, it seems cramping is multi-factorial with the largest contribution from the neural or muscle physiology, opposed to the metabolic system.

Continue Reading

Optimizing Feedback in the Pool: Part II

Part I

An ageless question in coaching: Do we praise the good (positive feedback) or highlight the bad (negative feedback)? Balancing positive and negative feedback is a delicate balance for all coaches, myself included. We’ll commonly tell swimmers “don’t cross over” or “don’t drop the elbow” or “stop lollygagging your turns.” Many coaches rule the deck with an aura of negativity, believing that negative feedback builds toughness and positive feedback breeds softness. Some negativity is necessary for group discipline, but does negative feedback actually impair motor learning?

Studies on “learner-requested feedback” are instructive in this area. When given a choice of when to receive feedback, how to subjects respond? Chiviakowsky (2012) performed a timing experiment in which two experimental groups received different standards of what qualified as “good” performance (one of which was restrictive, the other a permissive standard). The control group did not receive any standards, but could still ask for the result.

The group with the more permissive standard of “good” performance and the control group both outperformed the “restrictive” group. Authors concluded, “The typical learning benefits of self-controlled practice can be thwarted by depriving learners of the opportunity of experiencing competence through good performance.” Indeed, knowing of your success is good and how we frame the definition of “good” can have a significant impact on learning.



Some related studies compare knowledge of good results versus knowledge of bad results, where results are provided to all subjects. The literature has consistently shown that feedback of good results improves retention. (Wulf 2007, Saemi 2012). That said, feedback need not come only from the coach but may come from other sources like the pace clock, training aids, or the swimmer’s inherent feel for mechanics

Results are consistent when subjects are provided their standing in relation to peers. Lewthwaite (2010) conducted balance test in which groups were told of a fictitious standing relative to others. The group that was given positive feedback outperformed the negative feedback group in learning.

Wulf (2010) found a similar result in a timing task involving ten trials. Subjects were told they performed better or worse than average (again, these comparison results were fictitious). The group that was told they were better than average had better retention in a follow up trial.

Conclusion
The obvious limitation is that lab tests like beanbag tosses and timing tests in the lab aren’t perfect analogs to the highly complex swim stroke. Nonetheless, clearly the evidence suggests that positive feedback enhances learning more than negative feedback. This information is not to suggest we lower standards and pat everyone on the back for participating, though it’s clear that positive reinforcement in general can improve skill retention. It simply means that the brain craves reinforcement after success.

References

1. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G. Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2007 Mar;78(2):40-7.
2. Saemi, E., Porter, J.M., Varzaneh, A.G., Zarghami, M., & Maleki, F. (in press). Knowledge of results after relative good trials enhances self-efficacy and motor learning. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. Volume 13, Issue 4, July 2012, Pages 378–382
3. Lewthwaite R., Wulf G. (2010). Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 63, 738–749. doi: 10.1080/17470210903111839
4. Wulf G, Chiviacowsky S, Lewthwaite R. Normative feedback effects on learning a timing task. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2010 Dec;81(4):425-31.
5. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, Lewthwaite R. Self-controlled learning: the importance of protecting perceptions of competence. Front Psychol. 2012;3:458. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00458. Epub 2012 Nov 2.

By Allan Phillips. Allan and his wife Katherine are heavily involved in the strength and conditioning community, for more information refer to Pike Athletics.

Continue Reading

Weekly Round-up

1. High School Knee Injuries
2. Heart Rate vs. Heart Rate Variability: Endurance Sport Application, Part I(A)
3. Restorative Training
4. Do Pain Pills Impair Muscle Growth?
5. BUTTERFLY BREAKOUTS: THINK OUT, NOT UP

Continue Reading

Does Variability Enhance Motor Learning?

Many instructors, coaches, and therapists are interested in the question - “does introducing movement variability during practice facilitate learning?” Unfortunately, the answer to this question is not likely yes or no. It is important to move away from the notion of considering variability as a static term because it is possible to introduce variability during practice in multiple ways, which may influence multiple results. Introducing variability may have different effects on learning (generalizing to novel conditions, finding optimal solutions, increasing flexibility) depending on the type of variability (task goal or execution redundancy) at which it is introduced.

Two Types of Variability

It is accepted that there are multiple methods to achieve the same outcome. One of these methods could be practiced in swimming by having swimmers perform different biomechanics at the same distance. This is known as variability of the execution redundancy. This has not been shown to improve flexibility of the task.

Another form of variability is variability in the task goal. This idea suggests variability in the task goal causes a different outcome. For example, performing a 400-meter swim and a 50-meter swim results in similar swimming, but different outcomes. A few studies have found practicing with variations at the task goal level leads to improved generalization and transfer to novel task conditions. Another way to cause tasks outcome variability is to add “noise” to the system. This could be performed by having a swimmer perform a start with their foot in an different position (perhaps higher on the block). This variability is also believed to cause  greater performance gains.

What is best?

These two forms of variability are still young in the world of research. Moreover, practical studies of high-level tasks (swimming) are probably never going to be researched. However, it seems performing a repeated tasks with a fixed distance results in greatest improvement at the fixed distance. However this form of training may impair transference to other distances and tasks. This currently suggests utilizing variability at the tasks level may not be appropriate for swimmers with one event, but may enhance generalization.

Summary

Future experiments are needed (especially at the execution redundancy level) to understand the mechanisms of how variability at these different levels affects motor learning. Given our current knowledge, the following may be important questions for future research, posed by Rangnathan et al:

· Are different types of motor skills (e.g., tasks that emphasize speed vs. those that emphasize accuracy) facilitated to different extents by introducing variability at different levels?

· How does introducing variability at different levels interact with skill level (e.g., the stage of acquiring a novel coordination pattern vs. the stage of scaling an already acquired pattern)? How does the amount of variability introduced during practice influence this relation?

· Given that there is a change in intrinsic motor variability with age and pathology, how does the influence of variability at different levels interact with these factors?

References:

1. Ranganathan R, Newell KM. Changing up the Routine: Intervention-Induced Variability in Motor Learning. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2012 Oct 15.

By G. John Mullen founder of the Center of Optimal Restoration, head strength coach at Santa Clara Swim Club, creator of the Swimmer's Shoulder System, and chief editor of the Swimming Science Research Review.

Continue Reading

Experimental pain inhibits infraspinatus activation during isometric external rotation.

Sackhouse SK, Eisennagel A, Eisennagel J, Lenker H, Sweitzer BA, McClure PW. Experimental pain inhibits infraspinatus activation during isometric external rotation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Aug 30.

Pain Inhibits Shoulder Strength | REHABILITATION

Background

Infraspinatus weakness is commonly associated with external impingement and shoulder pain. Moreover, increased external rotation strength is associated with improvements in pain. Weakness occurs in many circumstances, including pain, fatigue, muscle size, etc. Pain is a complex topic, associated with decreases in voluntary activity (VA) of the low back, shoulder, and knee, despite the unknown mechanism.

The infraspinatus helps to stabilize the shoulder and infraspinatus weakness is associated with shoulder injuries secondary to excess humeral head translation.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of acute experimental pain on rotator cuff muscle force and VA.

What was done

Eighteen healthy subjects performed strength tests for the infraspinatus with electromyography (EMG). Then, the subjects had their infraspinatus injected with a solution to induce pain and repeated the same strength measurements 0, 2, and 5 minutes after the injection.

Results

All participants exhibited pain in the anterior and lateral aspect of the shoulder (some also had pain in the forearm). Force, VA, and pain were significantly changed after the injection.

Discussion

This study suggests experimental pain decreases force and VA. Even though this was experimentally induced pain, the pain noted was similar to pain documented in those with clinical subacromial impingement. However, the exact structures involved may be different in the clinical setting. However, decreasing pain should be a primary goal for improvement of force and VA in those with shoulder pain.

Practical Implication

In those with shoulder pathologies, improving shoulder pain is mandatory for strength improvements. Improving pain is the first priority for improving strength. Once pain is resolved, then targeted strengthening may be required for prevention of injury reoccurrence.

Related Reading

Pain and Swimming Part I

Pain and Swimming Part II 

Referred Shoulder Pain

Swimming Science Research Review 

This is a piece of the Swimming Science Research Review. Read Swimming Science Research Review October 2012 for a complete list of the articles reviewed.

Sign-up here to receive this month's edition and all future publications for only $10/month. Each edition covers articles ranging from biomechaincs, physiology, rehabilitation, genetic, and much more! These reviews explain the latest sports science research in straightforward language.

This will help you apply knowledge in the review to the pool deck, separating yourself from your peers!

And don’t worry, there’s no fixed commitment period, so if you don’t want to continue receiving the monthly publication, you can just cancel your payment whenever you want.

$10/month

Continue Reading

Stretching: Acute versus Regular

Stretching is a time honor edtradition in sports, but has recently been highly scrutinized both in the reaserach literature and in the coaching field. As a result, many have banished stretching to the exercise waste baske tin favor of other methods. But is that entirely justified?....

Most people overlook the difference between acute stretching versus regular (or habitual)stretching. Research generally show sacute (pre-exercise) stretching is ineffective. Shrier (2004) conducted a review of stretching studies addressing both acute and regular stretching. Regarding acute stretching, 22 out of 23 studies showed no benefit or a loss of performance in force, torque, and jumping height.

The ineffectiveness of acute stretching was consistent for all the following variables…(1) static,ballistic, and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretches; (2)males and females;(3) competitive and recreational athletes; (4) children and adults; (5) trained or untrained subjects; and (6) with or without warm-up.

However, the picture is much brighter for regular stretching…Shrier found seven out of nine studies revealed performance improvements via regular stretching. None of the nine studies showed decreased performance with stretching. The two studies showing no benefit were on running/gait economy, which is not surprising given that stiffness has been shown to aid economy via improved elastic recoil during the foot strike.

So what’s the mechanism behind performance improvements from stretching? Shrier notes that hypetrophy(yes you read that right) is one benefit from regular stretching. “When a muscle is stretched 24 hours per day,some hypertrophy occurs even though the muscle has not been contracting. If stretching a muscle group for 30 to 60seconds/day over months also results in hypertrophy, one would predict an increase in force and contraction velocity; this was observed in every study that investigated these outcomes.”



One example of regular stretching and performance…Worrell (1994)tested PNF stretching and static stretching and found that a hamstring stretching regime improved isokinetic torque concentrically at 60 and 120degrees, and eccentrically at 120 degrees (but not 60 degrees). Surprisingly stretching did NOT result in improved flexibility among subjects but did result in the aforementioned torque gains.

Hunter (2002) also found favorable performance results via a stretching routine. Subjects were broken into groups: power training, stretching, power + stretching together, and a non-intervention control. All but the control group improved counter-movement jump performance, while the power and th epower+stretching group improved drop jump height.

This information doesn’t mean that stretching will work for everyone, nor does it mean that all stretching protocols will work if done regularly. For example, Kay (2012) found that few benefits occur from static stretching beyond30-45 seconds and that stretching over 60 seconds may impair performance. Further, “the evidence suggests that increasing range of motion beyond function through stretching is not beneficial and can actually cause injury and decrease performance.” (Ingraham 2003) The main point is that research on acute stretching is not to be confused with research on regular stretching. When done in the right doses, at the right times, and for the right athlete, regular stretching may confer performance benefits.

Conclusion

The major limitation on the research is the lack of uniformity in what we call “stretching.” How long should we stretch, how often should we stretch, and do specific muscles benefit more than others? How can we tell what technique is best for what athlete? Also, if stretching does confer benefits, how does it compare to other tools and techniques? There are still many questions in this area, but we need not treat stretching as poison for the muscles, as some seem to believe.

For now, we know that when done regularly, stretching induces specific beneficial muscle adaptations and can improve performance, so long as it does not create excess mobility. But to suggest that regular stretching automatically robs athletes of power, force, and speed would be incorrect. It might for some athletes when done to excess, but certainly not for all.

References 

1. Worrell TW, Smith TL, Winegardne rJ. Effect of hamstring stretching on hamstring muscle performance. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1994 Sep;20(3):154-9.
2. Hunter JP, Marshall RN. Effects of power and flexibility training on vertical jump technique. Med Sci Sports Exerc.2002 Mar;34(3):478-86.
3. Ingraham SJ. The role of flexibility in injury prevention and athletic performance: have we stretched the truth? Minn Med. 2003 May;86(5):58-61.
4. Kay AD, Blazevich AJ. Effect of acute static stretch on maximal muscle performance: a systematic review. Med Sci Sports Exerc.2012 Jan;44(1):154-64. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318225cb27.
5. Shrier I. ClinJ Sport Med. 2004 Sep;14(5):267-73. Does stretching improve performance? A systematic and critical review of the literature.

By Allan Phillips. Allan and his wife Katherine are heavily involved in the strength and conditioning community, for more information refer to Pike Athletics.

Continue Reading

Weekly Round-up

1. Detailed Barcelona Swimming Results
2. Heart Rate vs. Heart Rate Variability: Endurance Sport Application, Part I
3. HMB Supplementation: Pre- or Pre- and Post-Workout? Anti- or Pro-Inflammatory? MA Thesis Offers Food for Thought

Continue Reading

Why to Relax the Ankles?

Reducing drag is associated with swimming success. For all the strokes, a straight line from the hands to the feet reduces drag. One area with high drag are the ankles, which Allan Phillips has discussed in great detail on this website (Ankles and Swimming Part II, Ankles and Swimming Part I, Ankles and Swimming Part III, Ankles and Swimming Part IV).

Through these volumes of writing, the ability to relax the ankles is seldom discussed. Now, it is crucial to have large ankle plantarflexion (pointing) range of motion for decreasing drag, none are likely to discount this necessity, but is forcefully maintaining fixed ankle pointing the best route for swimming success? Swimming, like all sports, requires a specific amount of tension and relaxation for balancing proper biomechanics and energy conservation. This balance is key throughout the whole body, as each joint contributes to this delicate continuum. Luckily, these two areas commonly work together, but the ankles are one area where an over emphasis on reducing drag may cripple specific swimmers maximally forcing their ankles down during an entire race.

Now, this article does not have an answer for the most ideal foot position, as this balance likely requires individualization for each specific race. However, is it possible excessively pointing the ankles may induce early fatigue in many swimmers?

One case example was addressed in Sun Yang 1500 Swimming Stroke Analysis London 2012. As the frames depict, this elite swimmer relaxes his ankles at the beginning of the upkick, seemingly whipping his heels back to the surface of the water. Does this action conserve energy? Create energy? Speed the tempo of the kick? These are essential questions to consider as a coach as one size never fits everyone.

Finding the balance between each individual, distance, and stroke are essential for swimming success. Ankle relaxation is another area which requires a balance between energy conservation and maximal velocity. What do you coaches suggest? Maximal ankle pointing and relaxed ankles?

By G. John Mullen founder of the Center of Optimal Restoration, head strength coach at Santa Clara Swim Club, creator of the Swimmer's Shoulder System, and chief editor of the Swimming Science Research Review.

Continue Reading

Effects of isocaloric carbohydrate vs. carbohydrate-proteinsupplements on cycling time to exhaustion

Richardson KL, Coburn JW, Beam WC, Brown LE. Effects of isocaloric carbohydrate vs. carbohydrate-proteinsupplements on cycling time to exhaustion.J Strength Cond Res. 2012 May;26(5):1361-5.

Background
Carbohydrates are thought to supply energy for the conversion of adenosine diphosphate to adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Prolonged exercise decreases glycogen stores, which require replenishing. After exercise, glycogen sensitivity increases, converting more carbohydrates to replenish glycogen directly following exercise.

Protein and carbohydrate drinks are thought to increase glycogen stores after exercise more than carbohydrates alone. Unfortunately, few studies have used the same amount of calories in these comparisons. Moreover, exercise studies suggest protein and carbohydrate drinks increase time-to-exhaustion.

“[T]he present study was conducted to examine the effect of frequent postexercise consumption of commercially available isocaloric CHO and CHO-Pro supplements on time to exhaustion during a subsequent bout of exercise (Richardson 2012).”

What was done
Seven men and four women received isocaloric drinks of either carbohydrate or protein and carbohydrate drinks every 30 minutes to measure recovery as measured by repeated time-to-exhaustion. The participants performed a warm-up, then an incremental cycling test to exhaustion. After exhaustion, the participants performed a cool down, followed by 3 hours of recovery where carbohydrate or carbohydrate and protein drink was consumed at 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes. The carbohydrate drink was 1.5 g/kg of body weight and the carbohydrate and protein drink had 1.2 g/kg of body weight carbohydrate and 0.3 g/kg of body weight protein.

After three hours, the participants performed another time-to-exhaustion test.

Results
There was no statistically significant difference in time-to-exhaustion between groups.

Discussion
The findings of this study conflicts with the findings of other literature. However, it appears that frequent isocaloric drink consumption results in similar recovery patterns. Other studies have used less frequent drink consumption, unfasted athletes, and more conditioned athletes, which are potential reasons for the different results.

Practical Implication
In swimming workouts and meets, where frequent sprints are performed, it appears either drink composition provides similar recovery benefits. Future studies, should look at different glycemic index carbohydrates and protein (whey used in this study). Moreover, studies with more conditioned athletes are necessary.

Swimming Science Research Review

This is a piece of the Swimming Science Research Review. Read Swimming Science Research Review October 2012 for a complete list of the articles reviewed.

Sign-up here to receive this month's edition and all future publications for only $10/month. Each edition covers articles ranging from biomechaincs, physiology, rehabilitation, genetic, and much more! These reviews explain the latest sports science research in straightforward language.

This will help you apply knowledge in the review to the pool deck, separating yourself from your peers!

And don’t worry, there’s no fixed commitment period, so if you don’t want to continue receiving the monthly publication, you can just cancel your payment whenever you want.

$10/month

Continue Reading

Kinesiotape for Length, Strength, and Timing

Kineisotape remains highly a debated treatment. During the summer Olympics, taping had renewed scrutiny due to its popularity in the Olympics.  In truth, the evidence has been mixed, though still incomplete.  In this post, we’ll look some research that does exist to better understand the evidence.  

Keep in mind that research does not account for nuances in how tape is applied, as I can tell you firsthand that the craftsmanship of trained clinicians far exceeds “locker room” self-application.  This may be one area in which clinicians are ahead of researchers.  I’ve recently spent a lot of time volunteering in a clinic recently that frequently uses Kinesiotape.  One point noting is that clinicians with formal training from tape companies have far more techniques in their arsenal than someone who just throws tape on areas that feel tight or sore.  If you fully immerse yourself in the system, there’s actually quite a depth of thought in the techniques, even if those techniques have not been tested by formal research.

For this article, I’ll use Kinesiotape as a catchall term, but recognize that different brands and methods of similar tape exist (Leukotape, Rocktape, etc), along with more restrictive methods such as McConnell taping.    For previous discussion on taping, see Tape Addicts and Shoulder Taping. 

Williams (2012) conducted a meta-analysis of previous Kinesiotaping studies, initially surveying ninety six studies but including only ten that met sufficient quality standards for additional analysis.  They examined these studies to examine taping’s effect on pain, range of motion, strength, and proprioception.

Undoubtedly the primary reason for anyone using Kinesiotape is due to pain.  Authors found only one study out of ten in which Kinesiotaping was shown to improve pain, and even so, the result was clinically insignificant.  Note this study was conducted on car accident whiplash sufferers with neck pain, so it’s unclear whether it transfers to repetitive use athletic injuries.   Further, pain is often treated indirectly and Kinesiotape may be effective for general effects on muscle length, strength, and proprioception.

Perhaps the most relevant study on range of motion is Hsu (2009), which studied baseball players with shoulder impingement.  Most swimmers aren’t using tape unless previously or currently symptomatic, so studies on pain free athletes are perhaps less relevant. Authors measured scapular orientation at twenty four different positions and concluded “the effect of KT is likely to be trivial, or even possibly harmful for certain measurements, and therefore would not be recommended for use in treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome.”  More study is needed on range of motion due to the wide mix of joints and patient health statuses included in these studies, at times with conflicting results.

Strength results appear promising, as five strength measures collected in the studies were found to increase significantly.  Notably, Hsu found significant strength increases in the lower trapezius strength when taped.  No studies showed any strength loss resulting from Kinesiotape.  Still, there is insufficient evidence to definitively conclude Kinesiotaping is or is not effective at improving strength.

Studies also measured proprioception.  Chang (2010) measured grip strength perception error and found small benefit in healthy subjects, while Halseth(2004) found no significant effects on perception of ankle positioning.  Subsequent to the publication of Williams’ meta-analysis, Change (2012) found proprioception improvements in both healthy subjects and baseball pitchers with medial epicondylitis. 

Conclusion
Overall the evidence is incomplete, but not definitive in either direction.  Most notably, Kinesiotaping has not been tested thoroughly in combination with other procedures.  It’s possible that taping may have different effects done as a standalone treatment versus when used to reinforce a clinical procedure (spinal manipulation, massage, dry needling, etc).

My personal opinion is that Kinesiotape may have actual effects but the mechanisms are still unknown.  It may take several years to separate taping from the methods that it is frequently paired with.  It is still too early to call it a placebo or alternatively, a miracle treatment.  That said, because much anecdotal evidence exists with very little observed side effects (other than tape addiction), Kinesiotape deserves consideration as a method to improve muscle length, strength, and timing, especially when used to support other interventions.   

References

1. Williams S, Whatman C, Hume PA, Sheerin K. Kinesio taping in treatment and prevention of sports injuries: a meta-analysis of the evidence for itseffectiveness.  Sports Med. 2012 Feb 1;42(2):153-64. doi: 10.2165/11594960-000000000-00000.
2. Chang HY, Wang CH, Chou KY, Cheng SC.  Could forearm Kinesio Taping improve strength, force sense, and pain in baseball pitchers with medial epicondylitis?  Clin J Sport Med. 2012 Jul;22(4):327-33. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0b013e318254d7cd.
3. Chang HY, Chou KY, Lin JJ, Lin CF, Wang CH.  Immediate effect of forearm Kinesio taping on maximal grip strength and force sense in healthy collegiate athletes.  Phys Ther Sport. 2010 Nov;11(4):122-7. Epub 2010 Aug 1.
4. Halseth T. McChesney JW. DeBeliso M. et al. The effects of Kinesio taping on proprioception at the ankle. J Sports Sei & Med 2004; 3(1): 1-7.
5. Hsu YH. Chen WY. Lin HC. et al. The effects of taping on scapular kinematics and muscle performance in baseball players with shoulder impingement syndrome. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2009; 19 (6): 1092-9.

By Allan Phillips. Allan and his wife Katherine are heavily involved in the strength and conditioning community, for more information refer to Pike Athletics.

Continue Reading