WHAT does Adaptability Mean?
Adaptability is being able to adjust to any situation at any given time – John Wooden
Consider this quote from legendary American basketball coach John Wooden and reflect on your systems as a strength and conditioning coach. Ask yourself, if you had to move to a new organisation or sport tomorrow, would your systems still hold up? How much of it would you be able to keep the same? How much would you have to change?
Of course, this is a hypothetical situation, but I think it’s important to consistently reflect on what you’re currently doing, especially in the unpredictable world of working in sports.
Using a systemised approach to programming and periodisation can ensure the following:
- Frees up time for other tasks important to your role as a coach. e.g. coaching, reviewing data etc.
- If something unexpected happens, we have backup options ready to go.
- Keeps your athletes always ready to perform in competition.
95% of the time, your system should be universal across many different scenarios and contexts. 5% of the time, you may need to create something a little more “specific” based on the situation. Adaptable programming systems provide far greater clarity whilst still providing athletes the stimulus they need to achieve elite performance.
In the next part of this blog, I’m going to be discussing my current approach to programming and periodisation when it comes to adaptability.
PILLAR 1: Identifying Windows of Opportunity (WOO)
The first important pillar to understand is that we need to identify our “windows of opportunity” (WOO). Every sport has scheduling, and it’s up to us as S&C coaches to understand where all our physical preparation work can fit within that schedule. This consideration should occur prior to writing a program.
Consider these timings of when physical preparation can be implemented:
- Pre-training
- During training
- Post-training
- Pre-matchday
- Post-matchday
For example, pre-training is a great time to integrate some targeted preparatory movements that primes the athlete for movements that they’ll experience on the pitch as well as potentially a window of opportunity to dose in injury resilience/accessory work to ensure athletes are “feeling good” before they train.
Furthermore, we need to consider turnaround times between competition. Let’s look at some examples of turnaround times of competition for a variety of different sports. Keep in mind that the physical demand/impact on the body is generally going to dictate these turnarounds. For example, in MMA, it’s unlikely that you’ll see a fighter complete an S&C session after a sparring session or a fight. Conversely, in a sport like basketball, it’s commonplace to see NBA players complete strength sessions after a game.
Henceforth, here are some questions to answer when thinking about windows of opportunity:
- How many days out before or after a game are we completing the sessions?
- Does your sport involve physical contact? E.g. rugby or MMA
- What type of loading will this day have on the athlete?
- How long do you estimate the recovery from the day to be?
- Is there a mix of “high” days for loading and work and “low” days for recovery and skill development?
- Will it interfere with or does it complement other sessions or days?
- Can this day prime a subsequent session or day where they must perform or compete?
When you can confidently answer these questions, this is where you can then strategically place sessions for maximal effectiveness. As a framework, ask yourself, do your sessions and schedule achieve the following:
- Performance
- Recovery & Adaptation
- Stimulus
Below is a figure of what priorities we should place these domains during various times in the season.
Just as we justify why we use certain exercises in our program, we should also be able to justify why certain sessions exist within the schedule. I am a big fan of microdosing in my system, especially throughout the season, and this is mainly inspiration taken from Cory Schlesinger’s work in this field. He uses the following analogy of medication:
- Option 1: When we take a higher dose of medication with less frequency, we’re going to feel far greater side effects to achieve the same outcome.
- Option 2: When we take a lower dose of medication with higher frequency, there’s going to be a lower magnitude of side effects to achieve the same outcome.
This same principle can be applied to sports performance: “Bigger” S&C sessions are going to result in larger “side effects” i.e. more fatigue and more soreness. However, perhaps we can place “Smaller” S&C sessions throughout the week more frequently, which will result in “side effects” without the additional cost of high fatigue but still ensuring high performance and readiness.
PILLAR 2: Identifying Physical and Physiological Targets
Now that we have identified where we think our sessions will be best placed to maximise opportunity, it’s time to address our next pillar of adaptable systems – that is identifying the key physical and physiological adaptations that we’re looking to target for our athletes. In team sports, as S&C coaches, we’re generally going to be looking after these 4 categories of performance:
- Conditioning
- Speed
- Power
- Strength
Recently I’ve integrated Hunter Eisenhower’s “Force System” into my programming approach. His system uses 4 types of “Forces”: High, Slow, Fast and Human Force (I’ve called this Exploratory Force as I feel it better encapsulates what this category of “force” is about). Below is a tabular breakdown of how we can use this system with its corresponding category of physical performance into our programs to ensure that certain physical qualities are not neglected or left out.
Note as well, that these qualities all exist on a variety of continuums. We can further systematise our programming using further heuristics:
- General to Specific: How can we affect the transference to the sport?
- Simple to Complex: Do we have progressions and regressions?
- Static/Slow to Fast: Can we change the speed of the movement?
- Extensive to Intensive: Can we alter the intensity of the movement?
- Closed to Open: How can we alter the perceptual and cognitive demands?
PILLAR 3: Planning Volume and Intensity
The final key pillar is to consider the volume and intensity of the macro-cycles and micro-cycles. This is going to be largely dictated some of the following factors summarised in the table below:
- Phase of the season
- Position of the player
- How many minutes a player is playing?
As most of us know, it is necessary to plan volume and intensity in a manner that elicits progressive overload over a period. Additionally, we need to ensure that athletes also receive recovery where possible to supercompensate for the adaptations gained at both the microcycle and macrocycle levels. For example, if we look at the phase of the season, say in football, we know that pre-season will have a far greater volume of conditioning load and reduced recovery load compared to the in-season, where the focus becomes recovery load becomes greater and the conditioning load reduces.
If we consider the positional demands of the athletes, we know that the movement demands are going to be vastly different. Below is a table which summarises priorities based on positions in football using the 4 Force System:
As you can see, the most obvious example here would be comparing the priority of Maximal Velocity Sprinting for Goalkeepers versus for Wingers. This is not to say that we completely neglect Maximal Velocity Sprinting for GKs as it’s still important to be prepared for “any situation”, but Maximal Velocity Sprinting is not something that is going to differentiate them from being an average-level GK to them being an elite-level GK.
Finally, we’ll need to consider the role of the athlete within the squad. Starters, substitutes and non-players/reserves are going to require different volumes and intensities throughout the season. If you remember to the start of the blog, in team sports, it’s essential to ensure that all players are ready to play should they be called upon by the Head Coach.
PRIORITIES BASED ON SQUAD ROLE:
For our starters:
During the season for our starters, the main goal is to ensure that they are recovering from each match. Adaptation potential is going to be limited. The least volume of non-specific training.
For our substitutes:
During the season for our substitutes, the main goal is to ensure that they can perform when they come on. There is more potentially more space to push for physical adaptations. Top-ups will be dependent on how many minutes they play. Moderate volume of non-specific training.
For our unused substitutes/non-players:
During the season for our unused substitutes, the main goal is to ensure that they stay ready for opportunities. These players have the most potential to push for physical adaptations. Top-ups are most definitely required to ensure players are conditioned and have exposures to maximal velocities, decelerations and changes of direction. Highest volume of non-specific training.
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Let’s use a typical football 1-week micro cycle. Here is a breakdown of how we can put it all together for starters, substitutes and reserve players. You’ll notice that the players/squad is mostly training together and completing the same sessions but with variances on the foci of each session based on their playing time.
SUMMARY
Using these 3 pillars for adaptable programming and planning, I am confident that you’ll be able to universally integrate this system into any sport and environment. You’ll be able to provide your athletes with the tools they need to achieve high performance, ensure optimal readiness throughout the season, no matter the squad role and also allow adequate time for recovery. As always, make sure you are well-versed in the nuances of your sport and your athletes. This blog is merely something to stimulate some thought and provide some inspiration for you to develop your own adaptable systems for programming!
