conteVolume 5, ntsNumber 4 May 2012 2 A Letter from the President

REPORTS 4 Division I Track & Field Division I Cross Country

5 Division II Track & Field Division II Cross Country

6 Division III Track & Field Division III Cross Country

7 High School

FEATURES 8 8 The Skill of Focus by Dr. Rick McGuire

16 Pole Carry and Drop by David Butler

22 Drawing Comparisons by Robert Vaughan, Ph.D

32 The Horizontal Translation in Discus Throwing by Andreas V. Maheras, Ph.D

40 Sprinter Needs Analysis By Brandon Morton

56 Updates from the NCAA Eligibility Center By John Pfeffenberger

16 AWARDS 40 49 2011 USTFCCCA Cross Country Regional Coaches & Athletes of the Year

Cover photograph by Kirby Lee: Image of Sport

may 2012 techniques 1 A Letter From the President

Publisher Sam Seemes am writing this the week after the NCAA indoor track & field championships for all three divisions. The NAIA championship Executive Editor Mike Corn was held a week earlier. Hopefully your indoor season was suc- Associate Editor Sylvia Kamp cessful. By the time this is published we will all be well into our MEDIA MANAGER Tom Lewis Ioutdoor seasons. One of the things that is unique about our sport Membership Services Mandi Magill and something I really enjoy are the transitions we have during the school year. Moving from cross country to indoor to outdoor track Photographer Kirby Lee & field provides an ebb and flow that is very different from any other Editorial Board Larry Judge, collegiate sport. Boo Schexnayder, Gary Winckler In the past few months I have been thinking about the world of sport in general and, more specifically, how our sports of cross country and track & field fit into that world. In preparing for one of my psychology classes a couple of years ago I came across a book by Robert Wright called Zero-Sum Game. Wright’s thesis is that over the course of time human progress is dependant upon interactions in which both parties involved end up with a positive outcome. These win-win outcomes (non-zero-sum) as opposed to win-loss (zero-sum) outcomes are what in the long run result in progress. While Published by Renaissance Publishing LLC there have been and will continue to be many instances of zero-sum interactions (war 110 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Suite 123, and political elections as examples), Wright suggests that, fortunately, over the course Metairie, LA 70005 of human history the non-zero-sum interactions have outnumbered the zero sum. (504) 828-1380 The world of sport offers many examples of zero-sum interactions. Every point/goal/ www.myneworleans.com run scored in a game results in a gain for one side and an equal loss for the other side, hence a zero-sum result. I think it is easy to see that our culture looks at most sports as zero-sum games. In every football, basketball, baseball, volleyball, softball, wrestling, soccer etc. game/match there is a loser and a winner. Yes, I do occasionally hear a coach say that some good came out of a loss. By far however the more common reac- tion from coaches, athletes and media seems to be doom and gloom following a loss. USTFCCCA Our sports of cross-country and track & field seem to be somewhat different in how National Office we look at the results of our competitions. While we do identify team and individual winners at our competitions, coaches and athletes can walk away from a meet feeling 1100 Poydras Street, Suite 1750 like it was a success regardless of what the team or individual placement was. Before New Orleans, LA 70163 anyone suggests that I am promoting our sport as being like the 5-year-old tee-ball Phone: 504-599-8900 league where every kid gets a trophy, I want to emphasize that I believe competition between individuals and between teams is important. Being an individual champion Fax: 504-599-8909 or a team champion is a big deal and should not be de-emphasized. What I am saying is that one of the things that makes our sport so great is the ability for an athlete to set a goal, work hard and intelligently to reach the goal and then experience the success and reward that comes when the goal is reached regardless of how that athlete compares to others in the competition. That kind of success is possible for every participant in our competitions (a non-zero-sum game). This is quite different than the more common occurrence where one half of competing athletes walk away from a competition as los- techniques (ISSN 1939-3849) is published quarterly ers and one half walk away as winners (a zero-sum game). in February, May, August, and November by the While I doubt that the phrase “non-zero sum” will become a common part of coach’s U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches day-to-day language, I do believe that it is another way to show why our sport of track Association. Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. No & field and cross country is the best in the world! part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publisher. techniques is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, photos and artwork even if accompanied by a self-addressed stamped envelope. The opinions expressed in techniques are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the magazines’ managers or owners. Periodical Postage Paid at New Orleans La and

dr. ted bulling Additional Entry Offices. POSTMASTER: Send address President, USTFCCCA changes to: USTFCCCA, PO Box 55969, Metairie, director of track & field and cross country, nebraska wesleyan university LA 70055-5969. If you would like to advertise your [email protected] business in techniques, please contact Mike Corn at (504) 599-8900 or [email protected].

2 techniques may 2012

NCAA Report Division l Track & Field and Cross Country

ron mann barry harwick President, NCAA Division I President, NCAA Division I Track and Field Coaches CROSS COUNTRY Coaches

was glad to see so many of you in Boise for the NCAA hen I first started coaching college cross country, people often Indoor Championships. It gave me great pride to asked me “What do you do for the rest of the year?” By the time Ipresent the Coach of the Year and Athlete of the Year WI explained that I also coach indoor and outdoor track, put awards. We are now in the heart of our Outdoor Season, on several home meets, recruit student-athletes, work with our alumni and I hope you are enjoying all the joys and challenges group and operate a summer running camp they usually had at least a it brings. I want to recap some of the things that the better idea of what a college cross country coach actually does. USTFCCCA national office, your Executive Committee, Like most of you, my team just wrapped up the indoor season and and I have been working on since the USTFCCCA immediately headed into the outdoor campaign. Even with that crazy Convention last December. schedule, I hope that all of our cross country coaches keep in mind that Along with Sam Seemes, our CEO, we have been work- our work is ongoing. Here are some items that we all need to keep up to ing on implementation of our “Strategic Plan” that we speed on, even while we keep our heads above water with track. adopted in 2009. As you all know, over the last two years, • Our sport needs to do a better job of is finalizing our schedules fur- much of our attention was redirected into finalizing the ther in advance. As I write this, we are still working with the NCAA to future of our Outdoor Championships. Now that the nail down the final two of our nine regional sites for the fall of 2012. I feel future of our Championships is clear, we are now able to strongly that we need to know at least two years in advance where we refocus on executing our Strategic Plan to make our sport will be heading for regional meets. It makes a lot of logistical planning more valuable and valued nationally and on our campus- considerably easier and also makes us appear more professional. es. As a part of this process, a working group of university • If you are planning on hosting a cross-country meet this fall, do presidents, athletic directors, and conference commis- some of the preliminary work now. Make sure you publicize the date of sioners met to identify and discuss areas that would help your meet well in advance. Labor Day is early in 2012 and that inevita- us better achieve our mission statement. Last month, you bly causes some questions about what the “corresponding date” to the should have received a summary of this meeting from the previous year actually is. Using contracts to commit visiting schools to national office. athletic events is standard procedure in many sports. This is a decision In addition, we have formalized our Championships worth discussing with your staff and athletic director. Advisory Committee, which was established when we • If there is a major event that you would like to attend with your team, adopted revised operating bylaws in 2009. This com- contact the host institution well in advance. If the meet director is will- mittee is chaired by past president Beth Alford-Sullivan ing to guarantee your squad a spot on the starting line then be ready and includes six other Division I coaches. The commit- to make a commitment to attend. Keep in mind that hosting is often a tee met in Boise to discuss how to better present our thankless job. Having coaches wait until the last minute to see where sport through our Championships, including making our other schools are going to go is a disservice to everyone who plans a Championships attractive for future live television cover- schedule in advance and sticks with it. age. As you are aware by now, we have lost live television • A lot of sports toss around the phrase “student-athlete.” After review- coverage for our 2012 championships. ing the long, long list of schools that received All Academic Team honors We also acted on one of the bodies’ directives at this I am proud to say that as cross-country coaches we are privileged to year’s convention by formulating a committee to make work with runners that live up to that name. recommendations to amend our rule book to include • Our executive committee continues to hold conference calls in more information relevant to conducting regular season the spring and summer. If you have an issue that you would like to see scoring meets. Dave Shoehalter will chair this committee, addressed please contact your regional representative or me. with Curt Kraft and Mike Maynard as members. Let me close by thanking everyone who coaches three seasons in a As we move toward our Outdoor Championships, I row. Only a fellow track and cross-country coach can identify with the would encourage each of you to promote our sport on stress and strain that goes along with being “in season” from late August your campus and in your community. We are the greatest to early June. If you already have a good balance between work and life, and most diverse sport on the planet! I look forward to congratulations! If not, add that to your already long list of things to do. seeing you in Des Moines. It continues to be a joy and an Best of luck to you and your team in your meets this spring. honor to be your president.

Ron Mann is the Head Men’s & Women’s Track & Field Coach at the University of Louisville. Ron can be reached at Barry Harwick is the Head Men’s Track & Field and Cross Country Coach at [email protected] Dartmouth College. Barry can be reached at [email protected]

4 techniques may 2012 NCAA Report Division ll Track & Field and Cross Country

steve guymon marlon brink President, NCAA Division II President, NCAA Division II TRACK & FIELD Coaches CROSS COUNTRY Coaches

would like to thank Kevin Buisman, Athletic Director of s we near the end of the 2011-12 academic year it is time Minnesota State, Coach Schuck and Coach Blue and their staff to start thinking ahead to 2012-13. Aren’t all coaches the Ifor all the hard work in making the 2012 NCAA Indoor Track Aeternal optimists/strategists who like to have something and Field Championships a success. Congratulations to all the to look forward to and be able to plan for!! athletes and coaches that were named regional “Athlete of the The 2012 cross country season will be an exciting year in Year” and “Coach of the Year”. Also, congratulations to Amanda Division II as we will see expanded national championship fields Putt – Hillsdale; Andrew Graham - Adams State; Lindsay Lettow for the first time in many years. Men’s and women’s cross coun- – Central Missouri; Ryan Loughney – Ashland for being named try championship teams will each increase from 24 to 32, and National Athletes of the Year and Jerry Baltes of Grand Valley automatic qualifiers from 16 to 24 each. State and Tom Flood of Grand Canyon for their team’s champi- The top three teams from each regional meet will automati- onship and being named National Coaches of the Year. cally advance to the finals, an increase of one team per region. The Division II Track & Field Executive Committee would like Each region will be allotted one additional team berth for each to remind coaches that it is accepted, and encouraged if applica- team finishing in the top eight in the previous year’s national ble, to nominate themselves for regional coach of the year. And championships, which is consistent with the current procedures this spring we will nominate and vote on assistant coaches for for selecting the finalists. This should give many coaches and their work during the indoor and outdoor season. There is a pro- athletes alike a new spark going into their summer training to posal being put together for convention to discuss separating out earn one of the new bids to Nationals! Assistant Coaches of Year for Indoor and Outdoor, as currently Speaking of the National Meet, which is November 17, 2012 done with the Head Coach awards. in Joplin, Missouri – we are making progress with plans for what Two additional traditions will be held during the athlete ban- has been termed the “Joplin Initiative”. Division II Chairman quet at the NCAA Outdoor Track and Field Championships. We Aaron Russell has spearheaded the efforts for our teams to help will recognize coaches that have retired or will be retiring from the city of Joplin recover from last year’s tornado. We hope to the sport following the 2012 track and field season. We will also raise $150,000 to be divided between the Joplin School District induct the class of 2012 into the Division II Athlete Hall of Fame. Fund and the Missouri Southern Tornado Relief Fund. Though it Congratulations to Mark Robinson (Catholic), Kendall Stevens seems like an ambitious goal, it boils down to an average of only (Findlay), Sherlese Taylor (Saint Augustine’s) and Zoila Gomez about $600 per sponsoring institution. (Adams State). As we make our way to Joplin next fall, we have a unique The Track & Field Executive Committee would like to encour- opportunity to showcase what we’re about in Division II. What age you to think about and begin submitting proposals for better way to utilize the compassion, unity, creativity and dedi- this year’s convention. Some of the topics of discussion in our cation that our teams possess than by coming to the aid of a Executive Committee conference calls are the NCAA Sports community that was devastated by an EF5 Tornado last May. A Festivals, hosting indoor national championships on over-sized total of 160 people lost their lives in Joplin on May 22, in addi- tracks, the voting process for the AOY & COY awards and going tion to 990 who were injured and over 8,000 buildings that were back to early signing dates. Please visit with your conference leveled. If ever there was a time and a place for the concepts of representative and feel free to voice your concerns or ideas so he service, balance, resourcefulness, learning, sportsmanship and or she can bring it back to our committee. Our job is to represent passion that Division II promotes, it is now! I hope you have our coaches and athletes and to strive to make our sport better. given thought and talked to your team about what you, your As for the NCAA Sports Festival for the 2013 NCAA Indoor team and your school can do to help contribute to the fundrais- Track & Field Championships, we have been informed that the ing efforts for Joplin! NCAA Championships Committee is currently considering two Finally, a reminder to all of you who are hosting meets this sites: Cleveland, Ohio and Albuquerque, N.M. By the time you fall to please implement the Preferred Cross Country Entry Fee receive this letter the site may have been determined. If not, program to encourage schools to join USTFCCCA. If you need please feel free to contact me if you have any concerns or ques- assistance check the USTFCCCA website for sample wording. tions and I will pass them on to Sam and see what can be done. I look forward to continue serving as your cross country presi- I wish each of you the best this outdoor season and safe travels! dent and working with you in 2012!

Marlon Brink is Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field and Steve Guymon is the Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field Coach Cross Country coach at Wayne State College. Marlon can be at Harding University. Steve can be reached at [email protected] reached at [email protected]

may 2012 techniques 5 NCAA Report Division llI Track & Field and Cross Country

chris hall greg huffaker President, NCAA Division III President, NCAA Division III TRACK & FIELD Coaches cross country Coaches

s I am writing this edition of the president’s report we There was no report submitted for Division III Cross Country for this are between seasons. By the time it goes to press I realize issue of techniques. Greg Huffaker is the Head Men’s and Women’s Athe outdoor season will be at about the midway point, Cross Country Coach at Illinois Wesleyan University and can be but I feel this is a good time to reflect on the indoor season and reached at [email protected]. to write more specifically about the new qualifying procedure. Prior to the NCAA initiating this new system many of the coaches had expressed concerns. I heard a great deal of con- versation about the larger field size for women than men, the tie breaking process and perhaps just a level of disappoint- ment in taking away standards. While we may still have some people missing the old system it is my opinion that the new “fixed field size” worked pretty well and would like to offer some post-national-meet information. First of all, the reason for a larger field size for women than men is simply based upon previous data that indicated women double at a much higher rate in the NCAAs. The NCAA was try- ing to establish a fixed field size that would allow for an equal total number of men and women in the meet and felt that 13 men and 15 women in individual events would not only bring in an equal number of athletes for both genders but would also bring us in at a similar number to what we had previously been allotted (223 men and 223 women). In the end they came very close to those numbers. The men actually still had a couple more people in the meet than the women did by a count of 218 to 216. The NCAA has told us they will re-evaluate the numbers but it appears had they gone to a 14/16 model we would have exceeded the 223. In regards to the tie-breaking procedure I did not hear any additional feedback from the coaching body. While I have heard coaches discussing that they would like to see all the athletes tied for the final qualifying spot advance I have not gotten any negative feedback about the way ties were broken. While we did not come close to having to flip a coin for a tie I continue to hold out hope that the NCAA will still come to a conclusion that if a tie cannot be broken in a competitive way that they simply advance the extra individual. In the end I personally believe that this new system did give more clarity to why people got into the meet. Looking at the TFRRS list throughout the season I felt both our athletes and coaches had a better understanding of who would or would not advance and why, thus taking away subjective decisions to the final qualifiers. For the first time applying this new sys- tem the results were pretty favorable and as it continues to be refined even into this outdoor season I expect the “fixed field size” to be viewed as a positive move forward.

Chris Hall is the Head Men’s & Women’s Cross Country and Track & Field coach at the University of Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]

6 techniques may 2012 HIGH SCHOOL REPORT

WAYNE CLARK

ermit Ambrose is synonymous with Michigan scholastic track & field and cross country. He was a founding member Kof the Michigan Inter-Scholastic Track Coaches Association (MITCA). The organization’s most prestigious award is the “Kermit Ambrose Award” given each year to that state’s most influential cross country coach. Our sport lost this legend on February 24th and I thought it was appropriate to share a bit of his story. I was only privileged to visit with Kermit Ambrose a couple times a year, but he was a good friend. He was your friend as well, a good friend of track & field and cross country for most of his 101-year life. Hailing from a small family farm in Pierce, Nebraska, Mr. Ambrose was considered lazy for going to high school instead of remaining home to help with farm chores like most of his 8th grade friends. His yearning for education led him in 1929 to Wayne State Teacher’s College. Shortly afterward he began teaching in a one-room schoolhouse for $2.50 per day. Because of his athletic background, he coached multiple sports. He taught in several other locales, and served during World War II in the African and European theaters. After the war Kermit settled in Birmingham, Michigan in 1954, where he taught science and coached football, cross country and track & field earning state cross country championships. Coach Ambrose mentored hundreds of athletes, most notably Olympic distance runner Jack Batchelor and former University of Michigan coach Jack Harvey. In 1967 Kermit retired from coaching, but continued to officiate at high school and NCAA functions for the next 44 years, well into his 100th year of life. The story has been told that in 2007 a former Michigan high school cross country runner attended his first cross country meet in 30 years. He said that the course looked the same; even the starter appeared similar to the starter when he had run as a high schooler. It was the same starter—Kermit Ambrose. Kermit attended every U.S. Olympic Trials since 1960 and all D-I NCAA Indoor Track & Field Championships since its inception at Detroit’s Cobo Hall in 1965. In total, Kermit officiated or was a spectator at over 100 meets every year. Kermit is remembered to have said, “Don’t be satisfied with giv- ing 100 percent; give 101 percent.” With his 101 years of life, that is exactly what Kermit did. He brought an enduring love for track & field and cross country to all venues he worked and attended, empowering those around him with that attitude. In the long line of people who have influenced our sport, I don’t know exactly where Kermit Ambrose will be placed, but I’m sure you won’t have to go very far down the list to find his name.

Wayne Clark is the Clinic Chair of the Ohio Association of Track and Cross Country Coaches. He can be reached at [email protected].

may 2012 techniques 7 The Skill of focus

8 techniques may 2012 oto h p

elations R ia d e M letic h t A ou zz i M

By Dr. Rick McGuire

Part 1: The Plan. Part 2 will appear in the next issue of techniques What Do All Coaches Want? I believe that what all coaches may want more than anything else is for their athletes to show up on competition day totally “focused” to deliver their very best performance. Possibly they want even more for their athletes to show up at practice every day totally “focused” to have a great practice, because, if they are focused at practice everyday, they will have a more effec- tive practice. They’ll be better athletes because they had great practice. Now when they show up for competition day, they will be better athletes, capable of delivering an even better per- formance, and they’ll be really good at being “focused” because they’ll have been practicing it every day. Then they’ll be really

may 2012 techniques 9 The skill of focus

focused and totally committed to delivering their very best If you have a wrong thought, all you have to do is PICK a performance. This is what coaches really want. Coaches RIGHT THOUGHT, and then the wrong thought is gone. want their athletes to bring their bestfocus today, every day! I control my thoughts. You control your thoughts. (McGuire, 2012). Thinking right is a skill. It is the skill of always picking to Thinking Right think a right, positive, focused thought. And, to recognize Thinking right in sport (McGuire, 2008)! This is the when there is a wrong thought, all you have to do is pick essential understanding and message contained in nearly a right thought, and the wrong thought is gone! Wrong everything that I share with coaches and athletes from sport thoughts hurt performance. Right thoughts help perfor- psychology. Thinking right in sport! That is as opposed to mance. We must teach and learn the skill of thinking right! thinking wrong in sport! It is such a simple concept, and yet We must teach the skill of focus (McGuire, 2012)! for many, such a puzzle. Thinking right in sport! It is such a Being focused is a perfect example of thinking right. So, simple concept, but one that really matters. Thinking right this is our goal – To be able to focus on every run, jump or in sport! It is such a simple concept, and when all is said and throw! And, to have the skill to be able to refocus for the done, it is really simple to do. next! Remember: Nearly all coaches and athletes recognize that wrong • Focus is just a THOUGHT! thoughts hurt their athletic performance. For any of us, • Focus is a SKILL! wrong thoughts, negative thoughts and distracted thoughts • Focus is CONTROLLABLE! get in the way and hurt our chance to deliver our best sport • Focus is a CHOICE! performance. • YOU make the choice! YOU take control! So, if wrong thoughts hurt performance, then right thoughts help sport performance. In fact, right thoughts, As track & field coaches, when we want our athletes to run positive thoughts and focused thoughts help us to deliver faster, we do more than just yell “run faster!” Similarly, with our very best performance. Thinking right in sport matters our jumpers, we do more than just yell “jump higher” or (McGuire, 2012)! “jump farther.” And, with our throwers, we go well beyond yelling “you’ve just got to try harder and throw it farther!” Thinking Right is a Skill In every case, we engage in teaching and developing better Thinking right is a skill. And, like all skills, thinking right skills for running, jumping and throwing! can be learned. Just like learning the motor skills that define • Focus is way more than just concentration. Focus is being … the running, jumping and throwing that make the sport • In the present of track & field, thinking right is learned through proper • Totally in the moment instruction, correct modeling, direct personal experiences, • In control and consistent, persistent repetition. Track & field coaches • Poised are all about teaching skills to their athletes! Coaches can • Composed teach, and athletes can and will learn the skills of thinking • Concentrating right! • Ready Focus, and being focused, is thinking right! Distracted or • Motivated unfocused would be thinking wrong! Track & field athletes • Engaged and coaches can learn the skill of being totally focused for • Confident each jump, each throw, each start, each interval, each drill … • Courageous and then being able to refocus for the next one. Focus is just • Resilient a thought. Focus is controllable. Focus is just a choice. • Tough Again, thinking is a skill. Just like learning sport skills, let’s • Able to refocus break down the skill of thinking so we can understand just • Totally trusting how simple this really can become. Every one of these are important elements of being in, or I think my thoughts. You think your thoughts. having great focus. And every one of these is just a thought. I think my thoughts one at a time. You think your Because they are just thoughts, any athlete could have every thoughts one at a time – sometimes many thoughts in rapid one of them at any time. They are just thoughts, so they succession – but, always one thought at a time. are just a choice. Thus, focus can be completely controlled. I pick my thoughts. You pick your thoughts. Focus is a choice! You can’t make me think anything. I can’t make you think Focus is the well spring of “peak performance,” of being anything. “in the zone” and of “flow.” Focus is the key to great perfor- I am responsible for my thoughts. You are responsible for mance! your thoughts. Focus is the key to unlocking an athlete’s kinesthetic If I have a wrong thought, a negative thought, a distracted genius and brilliant performance. Focus is the catalyst for thought, a bad thought or a thought that I just don’t want achieving excellence and success. Ultimately, focus is a vital to have, all I have to do is pick a different thought, a right key to performing, to achieving, to qualifying, to medaling thought! and to winning!

10 techniques may 2012 Thinking comes before performance. Performance ing about qualifying for the championships. In each of comes before outcome. Thus, to give yourself the these cases, having thoughts in the past or the future chance to perform your best, you must have the skill serve to undermine great performance in the present! and discipline to be Focused first. Getting to the present and thinking in the present is Focus is the single most fundamental skill of all sport really pretty easy. Time orientation can be controlled by skills! Coaches can teach the skill of focus! As track & asking one question, and then, by providing the neces- field coaches, we pride ourselves in being great teachers sary, right answer. This is not a magic trick. This is rec- of skills! We now must direct our attention on how to ognizing the need to be in the present, and exercising a teach the skill of focus! control strategy to get there.

Teaching the Skill-Set of Focus The question: WHERE ARE YOU? Now we begin to build the skill of focus. There are The answer: RIGHT HERE! RIGHT NOW! actually five skills in developing the skill of focus. They AND THEN BE THERE – PRESENT IN YOUR PRESENT! are … • Time orientation – Right here! Right now! Positive Self-Talk: Affirmations • Positive self-talk – Affirmations Your self-talk is just what you are thinking. Your self- • Composure – Maintain optimal arousal talk, is your own conversation with you. Most important • Concentration – Find what matters of all, your self-talk is the most influential conversation • Confidence – It’s a CHOICE! that you ever have. And, it is essential that you have positive self-talk! Negative self-talk hurts sport performance. Negative self-talk is thinking wrong. Control it. Change it. Choose positive self-talk, positive thoughts. It is important that track and field coaches realize that most athletes have developed the habit of very nega- tive self-talk, negative thinking, particularly in the most demanding and challenging situations. This means that they have the habit of thinking wrong! To deliver their very best performance, they necessarily must break this bad, self-defeating habit, and learn the habit of Thinking Right. They must develop the habit and skill of affirm- ing themselves. They must regularly use affirmations in their normal self-talk. Affirmations are strong positive statements about yourself! Affirmations are strong, positive, rational, stra- tegic, motivating and personal. Some examples of Positive Affirmations would be: • I am great! • I am strong! Time Orientation • I am prepared! Focus is being “in the moment” and “totally in the • I am tough! present”. Both of these describe the time orientation • I am ready! of our thoughts. The first skill or step in being able to • I trust! focus is having the understanding that there is a time • I believe! orientation in all of our thinking. We are either thinking • I am FOCUSED! in, or thinking about the past, the present or the future. • I am confident that I will deliver MY BEST! Figure 1 gives us a good graphic representation of • I will DELIVER! this concept of the time orientation of our thinking • I will do my job! (Reardon in McGuire, 2012). The central point is that • I will bring my BEST FOCUS TODAY!!! when it is time to perform, our thinking must be com- pletely in the present, period! But, before athletes can think right with affirmations, There are certainly times for the athlete’s thoughts to they must first have affirmations. It is the coach’s role be oriented in the past or focused into the future. But to provide great instruction and encouragement for ath- not when it is time to perform! Many a potentially great letes in writing their own personal affirmations. Coaches performance has been compromised or totally lost to are encouraged to use the model and examples provided thoughts about the poor practice session on Wednesday, here, plus their own personal experiences and creativity. or to the idea of “we’re training through this weekend,” But, it is critical that the coach help the athletes write or to being tied up into emotional knots over worry- their own personal affirmations. This will increase the

may 2012 techniques 11 The skill of focus

probability that the athletes will identify with their affir- mations, and then actually practice using them until they become a habit. Now when the athletes meet those challenging and diffi- cult situations, and they need to be thinking right thoughts, positive thoughts, affirming thoughts, they will have those affirmations there to be used!

Composure: Optimal Arousal Composure is being in total control of you, physically, mentally and emotionally, not too high, not too low, just right. Controlling one’s composure is directly related to controlling one’s level of arousal. Arousal is your level of “up-ness”. Physical arousal would be how “pumped up” you are. Psychological arousal would be how “psyched up” you are. Maintaining composure is controllable. Concentration: Find What Matters! Composure is just thinking right! Concentration is all about finding the right information and then staying focused on it. For every track & field ath- Applying this model, it tells us that for any given per- lete in their competition setting, there is a lot of informa- son, with a given task, on a given day, in a given environ- tion available. Some of that information is relevant to their ment, with a given set of conditions, there is a given level task at hand. This information matters! of arousal that will allow for optimal performance. To be But most of the information available is irrelevant to able to deliver their best performance, each athlete must what they are doing. This information does not matter and get their arousal level to the exact level that is just right for is just a potential distraction. them. If they are under-aroused, they cannot perform at Concentration is simply the skill of finding what matters their best. If they are over-aroused, they cannot perform and then staying focused on that, period! their best. But if they have just the right arousal level, then they can deliver their best. Arousal level can and must be controlled. Every person is a little different. Every task is different – the shotput takes a different level of arousal than the 10k. Every day is different, and conditions are always changing. But athletes must be at the right level of arousal to be able to deliver their very best performance! That never changes! Your athletes may not be able to immediately identify the exact level of arousal that will allow for their very best performance. But nearly all of them will absolutely be able to identify the amount of arousal that is too little, too under-aroused and not enough for them to perform their best. And they will also be able to identify clearly when they are too aroused, really over-aroused, out of control and unable to perform at their best. With just a little attention, a little instruction, and a little practice experience, your athletes will absolutely be able to identify and get themselves into their zones. Then, as they gain knowledge, awareness and trust in their skill, they can then narrow their zones, shrinking their tolerances for error and increasing the probability that they will deliver their This model suggests using a four-step routine. Your first very best possible performances. step should be to observe everything during pre-competi- Controlling optimal arousal is a primary skill in being tion warm-up. See it all, the things that do matter and the focused. An athlete cannot perform at their best unless things that don’t matter. As competition time approaches, they are at their optimal level of arousal. Optimal arousal is allow your attention to draw to only the things that do mat- a result of thinking right! It is just a skill! It can and must ter. The other stuff just goes away. Your concentration is be learned and controlled! beginning to narrow. It’s time to go! What’s your job? Focus on just a couple

12 techniques may 2012

The skill of focus

of key strategic cues. Your concentration is becoming very oto h p narrow, very focused. Visualize and see yourself perform! See it again, so pow- elations R

erfully that you can actually feel it. This is the connection ia d e

to your kinesthetic genius. If you can feel yourself perform M

before actually performing, your concentration is really letic h t focused! A ou zz i

There are no distractions! You are on! You are ready! M What is left to do? Go … trust … deliver!! Just like in the learning process of any of the physical skills, at first thinking about this routine, taking each step, will at first feel awkward. Athletes may think things like “I don’t like thinking this much.” They will even believe that it is making them perform worse, not better. They will be tempted to give up after the first five or six attempts. This is normal. They are in the cognitive stage of learning, where they are thinking about every step. They just haven’t repeat- ed this skill enough yet! Don’t give up! They will need at least 100 trials, maybe even 500, before they have formed and fully learned and internalized the skill, before it becomes a well-learned skill. But, unlike physical skills, they can do 100 trials of a mental skill in a very short time. There is no fatigue factor. You can even get as many as 1,000 trials done easily in a week. Stick with it and they will have learned and developed the skill of concentration! Once it becomes a well-learned skill, they can condense the routine into one continuous thought – “See it! Feel it! Trust it!” This becomes their concentration mantra and powerful affirmation, repeated over and over again. “See it! Feel it! Trust it!” “See it! Feel it! Trust it!” “See it! Feel it! Trust it!” When you have Concentration, there are no distractions. Concentration is a way of thinking. Concentration is totally controllable. Concentration affects optimal performance. Concentration is simply a choice. Concentration is Thinking Right! (Vernacchia, McGuire and Cook, 1996).

Confidence: Is a Choice! Confidence is just a thought. Confidence is not contin- gent on anything else. Confidence is just a thought. And, better! Choose to practice well. Choose to increase their just like any other thought, Confidence is a choice! If you strength, speed, endurance, agility, techniques, knowledge, want confidence, just choose to think confidence (McGuire, understanding and mental skills. They must choose to get 1999)! better. Choose to be more competent! Competence builds Confidence is just a thought. Confidence is controllable. confidence! Confidence is a skill. Confidence is a choice! And confi- dence is your choice! Confidence is thinking right! Choose Choice #2 – Choose to Focus on your PERFORMANCE! to think and have confidence! It is that simple! Everyone wants to win. And, if winning is important to you, then there is a good chance that you might have reason Confidence is Really TWO Choices! to worry about losing. Worrying is the opposite of being Confidence is a very important and impacting skill! confident. And, lack of confidence hurts performance. Lack Confidence is not a trick! And, it is not magic or good luck! of confidence is thinking wrong. It is a skill! Choosing to be confident is really based upon In every competition, the best chance that you have for making two choices! getting what you want is to perform your best. Performance always comes before outcome. Choice #1 – Choose to become more COMPETENT! Having confidence in yourself that you can deliver all that Athletes must choose to invest themselves in getting lots you are capable of delivering, will give you a better chance

14 techniques may 2012 of getting out all that you have inside. Confidence has a posi- their very best performance! Focus is a skill! Track & field tive impact on performance. Confidence helps performance! coaches are great teachers of skills! That’s what we do! Confidence is thinking right. Performance comes before outcome! Choose to focus on References your performance! Choose to be confident that you can and McGuire, R.T. (2012). From the Whistle to the Snap: Winning you will deliver your best performance! the Mental Game of Football. Championships Productions. Confidence is just a thought; thus, confidence is a choice! Ames, IA. McGuire, R.T. (2008). Thinking Right in Sport: The Critical The Plan – Next, The Delivery Importance of Mental Training. Techniques. Vol. 1, Number 3 In this first article, we have laid the foundational understand- McGuire, R. T. (1999) “Confidence is a Choice”, Track and Field ing that focus is a fundamental sport skill. And, like all skills, Coaches Review, Vol. 72, Issue 1. the skill of focus can be both taught and learned! We have McGuire, R. T. (1996), “Ready or Not...the Gun Will Go Off: identified that in fact, there are five specific individual skills that United States Track and Field Athletes Mental Preparation for comprise the “skill set” of focus, just like many skills comprise the 1996 Olympic Games”, Training and Conditioning, Vol VI, the skill sets of the high jump or the shotput. These five skills No. 4. give us the plan for teaching our track and field athletes how to McGuire, R.T.,(1992) “Concentration Skills for the Track learn to Focus. and Field Athletes: An Application of Cook’s Model of In the next issue of techniques, we will continue with Concentration,” Track and Field Quarterly, Volume 92 Number “Teaching Track and Field Athletes the Skill of Focus: Part 2 – 1, Spring. The Delivery.” There we will describe how the coach can take focus to track practice everyday, and how these five skills of Dr. Rick McGuire is the Director of the University of Missouri’s focus can become integrated into the daily routines of every Sports Psychology Program and was the Head Men’s & Women’s athlete and every coach. This is what we do with all of our other Track & Field Coach at UM for nearly three decades. McGuire has track & field skills! authored four books and has written countless articles for profes- What does every coach want? For every athlete to show up on sional and scientific journals. the day of competition totally focused and intending to deliver

may 2012 techniques 15 Pole carry and drop by David Butler

It’s Importance to the Approach, Free TakeOff, and Plant

16 techniques may 2012 itali Petrov, the father of modern pole vaulting and the greatest innovator of our beloved sport, discovered some interesting aspects of technique when he observed two pole vaulters from the bamboo and steel age. He viewed a 1951 film of a “one- Varmed” Russian vaulter carrying the pole in a vertical position as he ran down the runway, controlling the pole with his top hand until the tip fell into the “box” at the moment he planted and took off. He also stud- ied the great Cornelius Warmerdam, noticing that his takeoff drove the pole up towards vertical just at the moment the tip of the pole hit the box. When Vitali told me of his “inspirations” that moved him to develop “active pole drop” and “free takeoff,” I did some research of my own. I watched old films of the 1936, 1948, 1956, 1964, 1980 Olympics and, of course, Sergei Bubka. I watched Bob Richards win the gold medal with his takeoff dynamic, jumping off his big toe just as his steel pole hit the box. A free takeoff! I talked to Dr. Fred Hansen, 1964 gold medalist (and my dentist), and he told me that he would take off just a little “out” because he found that he could get the pole higher before it bent! A free takeoff! Bubka’s pole tip never stops dropping, falling in the rhythm of his accelerat- ing approach! Active pole drop! An “active pole drop”creates a faster approach and the movement of the pole to vertical before it bends, resulting in stiffer poles and higher grips for the vaulter! An “active pole drop” enhances the plant and improves the take-off angle of the vaulter, creat- ing a “free takeoff position”. Want to hold higher, get on longer poles, get on stiffer poles and PR! Improve your carry and pole drop!

THE POLE IS A WEIGHT IN YOUR HANDS! The correct pole carry is extremely important to the movement of the pole to takeoff. The “old” elbow out, tight wrist (bottom hand), open hand (top hand) carry creates tension and the inability to control the pole’s weight as it drops towards the box. Rather, the vaulter should have the bottom arm, elbow tucked, wrist cocked with the pole resting in a relaxed, open-handed grip. The top hand has a full grip on the pole! This allows the vaulter to be one with the pole! The pole is not lowered with the front arm; it is lowered with the top hand traveling up through the vaulter’s side or back ribs. The pole rotates in the front arm (fulcrum). The pole’s weight must be centered through the vaulter’s body so that the athlete may sprint upright,

oto fast and free! Hold the pole out in front and the h p vaulter will decelerate to counter the weight, either lee y falling forward or leaning back. Try running with a kirb barbell, dumbbells, or medball held out in front of you; it will be very difficult to jump with that weight static and throwing your body off balance. It’s Importance to the Approach, Free TakeOff, and Plant

may 2012 techniques 17 pole carry and drop

accelerate into a dynamic takeoff! Recommendation: Try approach- es on the track with a low, static pole carry and an active, dynamic pole drop. With the active carry and drop, you will have to back your run up 2 to 6 feet because you will be running so much faster!

THE PLANT The plant is a continuation of the running motion of your arms, left arm raising the pole up, fist through eye level and the top (right) hand passing in a straight line through the hip, ribs, shoul- der, cheek, eyes, forehead; and fully extended above the vaulter. OUT OF THE BACK The movement begins three The plant begins with the first step out of the back of your steps out from takeoff. As the vaulter sprints onto his/her left approach. Depending on the length of your run, the pole tip foot (right handed vaulter), the pole tip is eye-level or, in the is held at such an angle so that the vaulter can time the drop least, above horizontal to the runway. The action of the “top of the pole in total synchronization with the acceleration of up, tip down” creates a weightless pole! Driving from the left approach. The pole tip is at 70 degrees from a long approach, foot, the vaulter “flips” the pole, bringing it just in front of almost at vertical. The handspread should be at the width of the right shoulder. As the vault steps onto his/her penulti- the distance between your hands when the vaulter jumps up mate (right) foot, the pole passes through the right eye and to hang from a horizontal bar. pushes above the forehead. As the vaulter hits his/her takeoff The first three to four steps are extremely important, foot, the arms thrust up, fully extended. Think “push pole” establishing a gradual acceleration, powerful, hips tucked, or “make space,” getting the pole as high as possible before knees up, toes up, tall and upright, pole in line with the dis- it bends! The action of the arms must be in complete rhythm placement of the body, from tip to toe. The tip of the pole and coordination of the movement of the legs. begins to fall the moment the vaulter moves. Recommendation: Perform a four-step slowsmotion walk- ing plant. You will discover the vaulter’s plant timing and SYCHRONIZATION and ACCELERATION rhythm. This will improve their awareness of where the pole As the vaulter runs faster, the pole drops faster, a continu- needs to be in coordination with their steps. ous movement in coordination with the sprinting action to takeoff. The tip should not look like the “tick-tock” action of ELASTIC FREE TAKEOFF a clock. It should be “one fluid movement.” The weight of This is crucial! As the vaulter goes airborne, he/she must the pole transfers gradually from the top hand to the bottom continue the plant , following through by allowing the left hand, the top hand controlling the fall. An active pole pulls arm to give with the bend of the pole. The left must become the vaulter down the runway once he or she has pushed elastic, stretching above the vaulter’s head as he/she drives the pole out of the back. The top hand “releases the hip” as his head and chest through the arms. It’s called “taking it to the pole drops off six steps out from the takeoff. Releasing the top hand,” as if the vaulter was sliding his/her bottom the hip means not holding the pole to the hip but focusing hand up to the top hand, like the vaulters did before fiber- on keeping the bottom arm within line of the body, the top glass. The arms opening and expanding with the bend of the hand slightly behind the vaulter. This centering of balance pole will make the vaulter’s body even longer and that exten- with the pole allows the drop to be free and the vaulter to sion keeps the pole bending and “rolling over” towards the stay upright and in the position to jump at takeoff. crossbar. A good term is “chasing the pole” or “jumping over If the tip drops too early, the vaulter will chop his/her step the tip.” Rather than thinking that the pole stops in the box, or reach/overstride to counteract the weight of the static think of rotating the pole over the tip! Free takeoff is when pole. If the vaulter holds the pole tip too high and attempts the vaulter is jumping off of the right foot just as the tip hits to drop it fast into the last few steps, he/she will have to the back of the box and “the pole is straight” and reaching its decelerate to plant the pole. This active pole drop greatly highest point towards vertical before it bends. Head position enhances the vaulter’s ability to “turn over their strides”and should be up and looking through the arms, not tucked into

18 techniques may 2012

pole carry and drop

up” drill results in the vaulter not being able to get the bottom arm extended; therefore, the vaulter can get inverted but at the sacrifice of pole rotation. Recommendation: Study film of vaulters of all levels. Watch for the pole losing its speed of rotation; this slowing of the movement of the pole towards the crossbar is caused by pulling against the bend of the pole. Keep the arms up, and the vaulter will swing to the top.

ONE FLUID CONTINUOUS MOVEMENT The Petrov Method or the Bubka Model can be summed up in a few words. The pole vault starts from the first step out of the back. The pole drop or movement starts and continues to move the moment the vaulter begins his/her approach. The pole tip should never “freeze” or become the chest. static. It must drop with the rhythm Bubka states, “In pole vaulting, the crucial factor is how of the run. to transfer energy to the pole, through the complete body of This model or method was developed from the great steel the vaulter. If the pole begins to bend while the vaulter is yet and bamboo technicians of the past. It is the essence of pole on the ground, it is impossible to transfer that energy ... it is vaulting; whether vaulting with a straight pole or a bending lost in the box. When we perform a ‘free takeoff,’ we can feel pole, it’s all about moving the pole to vertical! Active pole the pushing action of the whole body.” drop and free takeoff are the keys to holding higher, run- Recommendation: On every drill and plant that you do, ning faster and getting on stiffer poles! As Sergei Bubka says, with the pole, on a rope or horizontal bar, always drive head, “Move the pole towards the plane of the crossbar, rather chest and hips through the arms. Elastic! than just trying to bend the pole.” Recommendation: Vaulters should spend a lot of time APPLICATION & DIRECTION OF ARM PRESSURE performing a six-step straight pole vault , pushing the pole to The terms “rowing” or “down-pressure” should be revised vertical and rotating it to the pit. Do this drill without pulling and reconsidered. From the elastic position, the arms will down or beside the pole. Stay behind and “chase the pole” to apply “up-pressure”, above the vaulter, with the hands vertical, always swinging under the arms. pushing and moving to 12 o’clock (arms pointing to vertical)! Drive your chest, torso and hips into the pole without Any action down or forward will result in the swing col- pulling. Gradually move your grip up one fist at a time lapsing into an L-seat or tuck position and the pole reacting and your step back one of your feet for each fist. The bet- to the shortening motion by unbending and decelerating its ter you plant and take off, the higher you can hold! Bubka rotation towards the crossbar. The vaulter should “cover the says, “Bending poles hide technical mistakes, but stiff poles arc of the pole” by swinging long and moving his/her arms (straight pole vaulting) immediately hurt you! It forces you to “in the rhythm of the swing.” learn the right action.” In fact, I don’t even talk about “up-pressure” until I get “Some see, many understand, but very few grind away at the vaulter on and long and planting correctly. Most young correctness” vaulters react to the pole negatively by tensing up shoulders, Golubtsov curling wrists, or collapsing the arms. Creating a positive relationship with the pole and plant is important: being relaxed, long, extended, and elastic. Many vaulters “block David Butler has been the pole vault coach at Rice out” with their bottom arms and the only way they can University for over a decade. He has coached multiple swing to invert is by “breaking” or “flexing in”the bottom All American vaulters including 2009 Division 1 Indoor & arm. Others are taught to “flex in” the bottom arm during Outdoor champion Jason Colwick. drills, to get them to an inverted position. Doing this “swing-

20 techniques may 2012

Drawing Comparisons by robert vaughan, Ph.d oto h p

lee y kirb “Obviously in the data of athletic records Record underscore the expected time course for depletion of CP we have a store of information available for in the working muscle. Top speed in the 100 meters is reached at physiological study. Apart from its useful- five to six seconds into the race and maintained for up to 30 meters ness I would argue that the study is amusing. before a gradual deceleration begins. Bolt’s fastest 10-meter split Most people are interested, at any rate in of .81 seconds or 12.345 mps occurred between 60 and 70 meters, England and America, in some type of sport. after which a gradual slowdown occurred due to reduction of CP in If they can be made to find it more interest- cell (28). As CP begins to decrease, ATP regeneration is maintained “Oing, as I have found it, by scientific contemplation of the things at a slightly lower level by anaerobic glycolysis. Maximal glycolytic which every sportsman knows, then the extra interest is its own regeneration occurs after five seconds to between 10-15 seconds (1). defence.” (11) The IAAF analysis of Bolt’s 200 meter World Record indicates The preceding paragraph was written nearly 90 years ago by the he reached top speed between 50 and 100 meters, then gradually Nobel Prize-winning physiologist A. V. Hill. He was the first to sci- slowed over the last two 50-meter segments. Even though he was entifically connect, through the various energy systems, the increas- slowing, as there was no reaction time and acceleration phase in the ing length of an athletic event with diminishing speed. We hope last 100, the elapsed time for that 100 was 9.27 seconds, .65 secinds that you find the following examination of athletic performance faster than the first 100. The slowdown from the fastest 50-meter useful, amusing, and interesting. A close relationship, in terms of split, the segment from 50-100 meters to the last 50 meters, was energy requirements, exists between select track events, primarily nine percent, due in part to the inability of the anaerobic glyco- the 100-200 and 5,000-10,000. How close are the relationships of lytic energy system to regenerate ATP as rapidly as the anaerobic the other events such as the 400-800 and 200-400? We can examine alactic sytem. The splits for both the 100 and 200 meters conform how closely they are related by means of using average speed in to the accepted physiology that depletion of available CP results meters per second (mps). Furthermore, we can use speed to further in a slowing stride rate. The close relationship between the two illuminate the role of the energy systems in performance in order events is further demonstrated in that the 100 and 200 meters have to aid in the construction of training schedules. In this article we had a history of individuals who have won both events in Olympic will explore the interaction among the anaerobic alactic, anaerobic Games or World Championships. Nine men and six women have glycolytic, and aerobic energy systems, and the speed that must be won the 100-200 double in the Olympic Games, while four men maintained to win gold at the World Championships or Olympic and two women have added the 100-200 double in the IAAF World Games in those events. All further references to the “seven-meet Championships. average” relate to Table I. The seven-meet averages are the win- ning average times for the 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 World 400 Meters Championships as well as the 2004 and 2008 Olympic Games in When the jump is made from 200 meters to 400 meters, there is events from 100 meters to the marathon. It has been known for considerable decrease in speed in the men’s world record perfor- years that as the time (distance) of intense activity increases, the mances from 10.4 to 9.3 mps, a loss of 11 percent, and a decrease capacity of the energy systems to regenerate ATP, and, as a result, from 9.4 mps to 8.4 mps and a nine-percent loss in average speed speed falls (12, 8, 14). Recently, others (12, 33) have used speed for the women’s world record. There is a corresponding increase in and time to fatigue as measured on a treadmill in the laboratory to the contribution of aerobic energy to performance as the distance predict performance. Weyand concluded that the performance of increases. Current research (1) demonstrates that by the 300-meter an athlete is determined by the relative dependence of that athlete mark in an all-out sprint, the contribution of the three energy sys- on aerobic energy sources. The longer an athlete relies on aerobic tems is 23 percent anaerobic alactic, 49 percent anaerobic glycolytic energy sources, depletion of anaerobic power is minimized and the and 28 percent aerobic energy sources. According to Duffield, the longer the performance may be maintained (33). We will provide aerobic contribution reaches 41 percent for men and 45 percent for results from meets of the highest caliber that illustrate the validity of women in 400-meter time trials (5). While anaerobic glycolysis can the laboratory research. regenerate high volumes of ATP, the amount available is less than with the phosphagen system. Therefore, when the event progresses 100-200 Meters from primarily alactic to glycolytic, the speed must decrease due to If you examine the relationship between speed in the 100 and a reduction in ATP production. There is further reduction as reli- 200 meters measured in mps, you will see a very strong corre- ance on the aerobic system increases (9). At all distances, including spondence. The average speed for the men’s World Record in the the sprints, women depend on aerobic metabolism to a greater 100 meters is 10.438 mps while the 200 record is 10.42 mps, a .998 extent than do men (30). Even though the production of the alactic relationship. The women’s 100-200 World Records show a similar system declines with time, it contributes up to 30 percent of anaero- pattern with 9.53 mps for the 100 and 9.372 mps for the 200, a dif- bic energy in events lasting two to three minutes (8). ference of only .17 mps. The speed of the 200 record is .978 of the It should be noted that only one man, Michael Johnson, and one 100 record. woman, Valerie Briscoe-Hooks, have won gold in the same Olympic Each energy system is activated at the onset of exercise and Games or World Championships in both the 200 and 400 meters. continues to function smoothly through changing intensities and The physiological requirements for the 400 at a world-class level dif- increasing time (8, 32). The anaerobic alactic energy system is the fer significantly from the demands of the 100-200, with an increase dominant energy source for the first five to six seconds of the two in the involvement of anaerobic glycolytic and aerobic energy sys- events (1). The degradation of CP peaks at 1.3 seconds and declines tems. Recent research (16) demonstrates that there is reduced neu- thereafter until the glycolytic system predominates. However, even ral drive as race distances increase from 100 to 400 meters. Tomazin before the aerobic energy system reaches 50 percent of energy pro- further states, in addition to significant low frequency fatigue at all duction at 60-75 seconds, it significantly contributes to sprint per- sprint distances, strength loss was present only after the 400 meters. formance. Duffield reported a nine-percent and 11-percent con- As with the 200, the peak speed attained in the 400 is in the second tribution of the aerobic energy system to performance for men and quarter of the race. The slowest section includes the final quarter women in the 100 meters. (3) The 10-meter splits for the 100 World (particularly in the 400, the final 50 meters). Michael Johnson’s

may 2012 techniques 23 drawing comparisons

pionship 800 races were won in less than 1:44.0, and those were the only three 800s in which the last 200 was run in 26 seconds or more. The women’s winning 800 times over the seven meets averaged 1:56.72. The women covered the final 400 in an average of 58.99 with a range from 58.1 to 59.88, a loss of one percent. The final 200 aver- aged 28.81, a one-percent improvement over the average race pace and two percent faster than the average pace of the final 400, nearly identical to the men’s results. The range of times for the final 200 was 29.6 to 27.6. The only two closing 200’s run under 28 seconds were in races won in 1:58 and 1:59, a full two to three seconds slower than the average for the seven events, further illustrating the validity of the prevailing anaerobic store concept due, in part, to the relative contribution of aerobic power. The tactics of World Record attempts lead to an altered utiliza- tion of the energy systems when contrasted with championship finals run after several rounds. As an example, there is a four-percent slowing for the final 200 meters to 26.4 over the average pace for Rudisha’s 1:41.01 World Record (24). The early speed of 24.7 for the first 200 and 48.9 at the 400 reduces the anaerobic power available for the last 200. Although the split for her final 200 was not available, records indicate that Jarmila Kratochvilova’s final 400 of 57.1 was one percent slower than the average pace in her 1:53.28 World Record (J. Hendershott, personal communication, January 31, 2012). The dramatic increase in reliance on aerobic energy sources in the 800, over the 400, has meant that few athletes have possessed the vary- ing abilities that provide the basis for success in both the 400 and 800. Alberto Juantorena, in 1976, and Kratochvilova, in the 1983 Helsinki World Championships, were the only individuals to accom- plish the double in Olympic or World Championship competition, final 50 meters for his 43.18 World Record was run at 8.33 mps as although Arthur Wint of Jamaica came within .3 seconds in the 800 compared with 10.08 mps for the second 50 meters, a reduction of 21 after winning the 400 at the 1948 London Games. On the way to her percent (7). Johnson ran the second 100 of his 43.18 world record in double in 1983, Kratochvilova ran a round of the 400 and a round of 10.3 seconds, 9.71 mps, and the final 100 in 11.5 seconds or 8.70 mps, the 800 on three consecutive days followed by the finals of the 400 a loss of 10.5 percent from the fastest to the slowest 100 (7), Marita on the fourth day. The high-intensity performance necessitated Koch slowed from 11 seconds for her second 100 to 13.5 over the last by repeated rounds at near-best effort may result in muscle dam- 100 in her 47.6 record, a loss in speed of 18 percent (J. Hendershott, age and non-metabolic fatigue (8). This could impair those athletes personal communication, January 31, 2012). You will notice in the who must perform at close to personal bests to advance to the next following paragraphs that, as the reliance on the aerobic energy round, especially in the endurance events. Each of the men’s World system increases, such as in the 1,500 and 10,000, the speed over the Records from the 100 to 400 meters has been set in the finals of the concluding portion of the race increases. In the 100-400 meters, the World Championships, or Olympic Games, while none of the of the opposite is true, and speed decreases over the concluding portion as men’s World Records have been set in the two championship meets there is greater reliance on anaerobic energy sources. in events 800 meters and above.

800 Meters 1,500 Meters There is an even greater reduction of 15 percent in speed for The fall-off in world record pace from the 800 to the 1,500 is World Record times when the distance increases from 400 at 9.3 mps eight percent, 7.92 mps to 7.28 mps for men and 7.06 mps to 6.51 to 800. with an average speed of 7.9 mps for men and 8.4 mps to 7.01 mps for women. The decline is considerable, but slightly less so mps for women, a reduction of 16.5 percent. Reasons for this dra- than from the 200 to 400. The primary reason for the fall-off is the matic change include a much greater reliance on the aerobic energy increased contribution of the aerobic energy system. The aerobic system in the 800 plus the strategy differences of events not run in contribution in the 1,500 is reported to have increased to 77 percent lanes. Both Duffield and Spencer have demonstrated a greater-than- for males and 86 percent for females (6). Since 1924 the 800-1,500 60-percent contribution of the aerobic energy system to 800-meter double has been accomplished in the Olympic Games by Peter performance (5, 15). Billat has proposed that speed in the 800 is Snell (Tokyo, 1964), Tatyana Kazankina (Montreal, 1976) and Kelly regulated by the prevailing anaerobic store that determines anaero- Holmes (Athens, 2004). Ivo VanDamme came close in 1976, but bic power available at the end of the race (3). The final 400- and 200- he was defeated by Alberto Juantorena in the 800 and John Walker meter split times for the previous five World Championships and two in the 1500. Sebastian Coe held both World Records when he was Olympic Games seem to bear out Billat’s assumptions. The mean for defeated by Steve Ovett in the 800, the first of the two events in the men’s final 400 meters for the seven championship events was Moscow 1980. In the Los Angeles Games of 1984, Coe lost the 800 51.9 with a range from 51.3 to 52.5. The 400 split was one percent to Joaquim Cruz by .3 seconds before winning the 1,500. Rashid faster than the average-race pace, with the final 200 another one Ramzi is the only athlete to double in the 800 and 1,500 in the World percent faster, an average of 25.67 seconds. Three of the seven cham- Championships. He accomplished the feat at Helsinki in 2005. The

24 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 25 drawing comparisons

Table I Compiled average of gold medalists in the IAAF World Championships 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011; Olympic Games 2004, 2008. Men Event AVG mps Split mps Fastest Split Finish mps %Diff+- 100 9.92 10.08 .82* 12.20* .86* 11.63* -4.9% 200 19.68 10.16 4.36** 11.47** 4.88 10.25 -11.9% 400 44.04 9.08 10.24+ 9.77 11.94+ 8.37 -16.7% 800 1:44.92 7.62 51.91 7.71 25.87 7.73 +.3% 1500 3:34.74 6.99 52.7 7.59 26.3 7.60 +8.8% 5000 13:17.70 6.27 53.2 7.52 26.1 7.66 +22.2% 10000 27:21.46 6.09 54.46 7.35 27.22 7.35 +21% Marathon 2:09.31 5.43 1:04.20 5.47 +1% 2:25.34 4.83

Women Event AVG mps Split mps Fastest Split Finish mps %Diff +- 100 10.88 9.19 1.89 10.58 1.96*** 10.20 -3.7% 200 22.01 9.05 4.96 10.08 5.59** 8.95 -12.6% 400 49.38 8.10 11.53 8.67# 13.52 7.45# -16.4% 800 1:56.77 6.85 58.89 6.79 28.81 6.94 +2.2% 1500 4:00.70 6.23 60.26 6.64 30.01 6.66 +7% 5000 14:58.37 5.57 60.31 6.63 29.50 6.78 +21.7% 10000 30:37.62 5.44 61.27 6.53 30.35 6.59 +21.1% Marathon 2:25.34 4.83 1:11.59** 4.89 +1.2%

Adapted from Track & Field News. 2003. 56(10): 9, 12, 17, 28, 30, 31, 34; Track & Field News. 2004. 57(10): 13, 15, 44, 47; Track & Field News. 2005. 58(9):12, 18, 22, 37, 38, 42; Track & Field News. 2007. 60(11): 12, 17, 20, 33, 36, 40; Track & Field News. 2008. 61(10): 10, 12, 14, 16, 20, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 53; Track & Field News. 2009. 62(11): 8, 10, 15, 18, 33, 36; Track and Field News. 2011. 64(11): 7, 9, 11, 16, 32, 33, 37, 41; http://www.iaaf.org/development/research/index.html; Usain Bolt 100m 10 meter splits. August 22, 2008. Speedendurance.com November 22, 2010; iain Hunter, personal communication, February 6, 2012; http://berlin.iaaf.org/recordsbiomechanics/index.html.

*Splits are for the 2008 Olympic Games and 2005 and 2009 World Championships only ** Splits are for 2007 and 2009 World Championships only ***Splits are for 1997 and 2009 World Championships only +Splits are for the 2003, 2007 and 2009 World Championships only #Splits are for the 2007 and 2009 World Championships and 2008 Olympic Games only

lack of individuals doubling in these two events may be due, in part, 200-meter times have been steadily increasing for the last three major to scheduling and the difficulty of performing at a high level through championships. It is possible that drug testing is having an effect. three to four rounds in each event over eight days. The average race time for the men’s final in the seven meets was 3:34.69, which is 6.99 5000 Meters mps. The men’s final 400 for the seven championship events aver- There is a slightly less than 10-percent fall-off in pace for World aged 52.7 (7.59 mps) with a range between 51.5 and 54.1 seconds. Record performances between the 1,500 and 5,000 for both men The average increase in pace over the final 400 was eight percent. and women. Also, only three men have succeeded in performing The two slowest finishing 400s came in the two fastest 1,500s which this double in Olympic or World Championship competition: Paavo seems to support the concept of prevailing anaerobic store. The Nurmi in the Paris Games of 1924, El Guerrouj in Athens 2004 and women’s final 400 averaged 60.26, and the range was from 58.1 to Bernard Lagat in the Osaka World Championships of 2007. Kip Keino 61.4 seconds. The average women’s time over the seven meets was missed by .15 seconds at Mexico City in 1968 when Mohammed 4:00.27, or 6.24 mps. This gives the finishing 400, run at an average Gammoudi defeated him in the 5,000. Gabriela Szabo was close 6.63 mps, a near-six-percent improvement over the average race in the Sydney Games of 2000, finishing third in the 1500, only .17 pace. Hicham El Guerrouj’s average 400-meter pace for his 3:26.0 seconds out of first after winning the 5,000. The women are at a dis- World Record was 54.9, or 7.28 mps. The last 400 was 53.5, or 7.47 advantage, having only run the 5,000 since 1988 and the 1,500 since mps an increase of just over two percent (J. Hendershott, personal 1972. It is clear that, while this double is difficult, it is more doable communication, January 31, 2012). The women, once again, show than the 200-400 or the 400-800. Even though there is the 10-percent similar results. Yunxia Qu’s last 300 was run in 45.3 (6.62 mps), 1.7 decrease in pace for the 5,000 in relation to the 1,500, in one section percent faster than the average pace for her 3:50.46 (6.51 mps) World of the race, the last 400, there are nearly identical splits for the men Record (J. Hendershott, personal communication, January 31, 2012). and women. The men’s seven-meet average for the final 400 was Interestingly, times in the women’s 1500, along with last lap and final 53.2, .99 of the speed of the seven 1,500’s final 400s. The average time

26 techniques may 2012 for the seven 5,000s was 13:17.70, or 63.82 per lap. The final lap was eight-percent loss for the women. There is a greater relationship, in an increase in pace of 16 percent. The women’s final 400 was 60.31, terms of speed in mps between the 5,000 and marathon than there .999 of the 1,500’s 60.26. The average pace for the seven women’s is between the 400 and 800, which points to the increased utilization 5,000s was 71.87, a 16-percent increase for the final 400. Tirunesh of the aerobic energy system in those events. Even though the 10,000 DIbaba’s last lap of 63.9 was six percent faster than her 68.1 average and marathon primarily utilize the aerobic energy system, doubling for her World Record 14:11.15 (21). The anaerobic cost of the body of in the two events has been rare due to the rigors of the marathon and the race clearly impacted Dibaba’s finish. It may be difficult to imag- scheduling difficulties. However, in spite of those difficulties, Mamo ine Kenenisa Bekele’s World Record of 12:37.35 as 12.5 laps averaging Wolde won both the 10,000 and the marathon at Mexico City 1968. 60.59. His last lap of 57.85, a 4.5-percent increase in pace, indicates Although the events were not in the same games, Carlos Lopes was the anaerobic toll of the first 11.5 (J Hendershott, personal communi- second in the 10,000 in 1976 at the Montreal Games and won the cation, January 31, 2012). We will provide further details concerning marathon in Los Angeles 1984. World Championship and Olympic the similarities in last lap times among the middle distance events in Games marathons are typically run in less-than-ideal conditions and the next section. on hilly courses, while the world-best times were set on flat courses in near-ideal conditions. In spite of these problems the men have 10,000 Meters averaged 2:09.31 for the seven-meet set of championships we have While there is a near-10-percent fall-off in pace between the 1,500 selected, only four percent slower than Patrick Makau’s 2:03.38 World and 5,000, there is less than a four-percent pace reduction between Record set in Berlin. The women have fared somewhat less well, the 5,000 and 10,000 meters, only .26 mps for men and .22 mps for averaging 2:25.34, or 12 percent off Christiansen’s world-best 2:15.25 women. Athletes with highly developed aerobic energy systems are set in London. able to maintain speed at near their upper limit (31). The close rela- tionship in terms of pace between the 5,000 and 10,000, points to a Combination Events nearly identical utilization of the aerobic energy system. The similar- One of the most interesting comparisons between and among ity is further illuminated when you investigate the men’s finishing widely different distances is in the combination events. The final lap times for the 5,000 and 10,000 during the past seven international 400 in events as disparate as the 800 to the 10,000 correspond in one championships. The average for 5,000 meters is 53.6, or 7.52 mps, somewhat unexpected respect. The anaerobic reserve capacity seems while the 10,000’s last lap average is 54.5, or 7.34 mps, a difference of to be closely related in that the speed of the final 400 varies little from only .18 mps. The average 400-meter split for the women’s final lap the 800-10,000. In the men’s events the 1,500 final 400 is run at 98.5 in the 5,000 is 60.31, or 6.63 mps, and 61.27 in the 10,000, a speed of percent of the speed of the 800, and the 5,000 at 99 percent of the 6.52 mps, a difference of only .11 mps. The ability of men and women 1,500. The 10,000 is run at 97.7 percent of the 5,000. The shortest of to accelerate over the finishing 400 points to impressive anaerobic the mixed events, the 800, is more closely related to the 10,000 in one reserves for athletes in these primarily aerobic events. The increase respect than the 200 is related to the 400. The final 400 of the 10,000 for the last lap (over average pace) for the women’s 5000 was 16.9 is run at 95 percent of the speed of the 800’s final 400 for men and 96 percent, and 16.4 percent for the women’s 10,000. The men’s results percent for the women. For women, the 1500’s average pace for the were virtually identical, an increase of 16 percent for both the 5,000 concluding 400 meters in the seven championship events was 97.7 and 10,000. The greater reliance on anaerobic metabolism during percent of the speed of the 800, the 5,000 at 99.9 percent of the 1,500 the body of the race during World Record attempts is demonstrated and the 10,000 at 98.4 percent of the 5000. The results differ very little by Bekele’s final lap of 56.9 in his World Record 10,000, which was between men and women, further indicating the importance of the nine percent faster than his 25-lap average of 63.1, but 4.4 percent physiology of the energy systems. slower than the seven-meet average (2). The women’s record demonstrates similar results. Junxia Wang’s finish in her 29:31.76 Summary World Record was only 7.5 percent faster than her 70.9 per lap aver- To sum up: Apart from the usefulness of this data, I would hope age (J. Hendershott, personal communication, January 31, 2012). that your interest in it will serve as its own defence. Significant varia- However, Wang ended her race with a 3,000-meter sustained drive tion in speed, as measured in mps from one event to another, cor- in 8:17. There have been multiple instances where athletes have won responds with increasing, or decreasing, involvement of the three both 5,000 and 10,000 golds in the ultimate competitions for the energy systems. The concepts of the available anaerobic store and year. Men such as Emil Zatopek, Vladimir Kutz, Lasse Viren, Miruts relative reliance on aerobic metabolism, demonstrated in the labo- Yifter and Kenenisa Bekele have accomplished the feat, Viren twice. ratory by Baker and Weyand, are supported by the results from the Bekele added a second 5,000-10,000 double in the 2009 Berlin World highest level meets (1, 33). The idea that a well developed aerobic Championships. Paavo Nuurmi came within two seconds of join- capacity serves to spare anaerobic reserve capacity appears to be the ing that field when Ville Rittola beat him in the 5,000 in 1928, or you most logical conclusion. Coaches, without the benefit of advanced could say Rittola came closer as Nuurmi outran him by only .3 sec- measurement tools such as magnetic resonance imaging, are able to onds in the 10,000 that year. Women have had many fewer chances determine the energy systems involved in their athlete’s performance as the 5,000 was first run in the Olympics in 1996, and the 10,000 in by simply measuring the speed in mps of the event in question and 1988 (1995 and 1987 respectively for the World Championships). an event on either side in terms of distance. As an example, an 800- Tirunesh Dibaba from Ethiopia won both in the Helsinki World meter runner who wishes to optimize his/her training could utilize Championships 2005 and Beijing Olympic Games 2008, and Vivian performances in the 400 and 1,500 for their predictive benefit. The Cheruiyot of Kenya took home both golds in the 2011 Daegu World results would suggest whether the athlete’s strength was in the pri- Championships. marily anaerobic or aerobic events and whether further attention should be paid to one or the other energy systems. It is clear from Marathon the figures we have examined that full development of each energy The marathon world record has a 10.3-percent decrease in speed system is necessary for success in events from the 400 to 10,000 in comparison with the 10,000 for the men’s world record and an meters.

may 2012 techniques 27 28 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 29 drawing comparisons

Conditioning Research: Epub ahead of print. 2010. Table II Hill A.V. The physiological basis of athletic records. British The Relationship in Meters Per Second of World Record Performances Association for the Advancement of Science: Report of the 93rd Meeting: 156-73. 1925. Men Event Record Holder MPS Relationship Hill DW, Vingren JL, Nakamura FY, Kokobun E. Relationship 100 9.58 Bolt 10.44 between speed and time in running. International Journal of 200 19.19 bolt 10.42 0.998 Sports Medicine 32(7): 519-22. 2011. 400 43.18 Johnson 9.26 0.89 “IAAF.org-Biomechanics Report.” Iaaf.org- International 800 1:41.01 Rudisha 7.92 0.85 Association of Athletics Federations. Ed Helman Hommel, IAAF, 1500 3:26.00 ElGuerrouj 7.28 0.92 2009. Web 04 Feb, 2012. Mile 3:43.13 ElGuerrouj 7.21 0.99 Sahlin K. Metabolic factors in fatigue. Sports medicine 13: 5000 12:37.35 bekele 6.60 0.92 99-107. 1992. 10000 26:17.45 bekele 6.34 0.96 Spencer MR, Gastin PB. Energy system contribution during Marathon 2:03:38 Makau 5.69 0.90 200- to 1500-m running in highly trained athletes. 33: 157-62. 2001. Women Event Record Holder MPS Relationship Tomazin K, Morin JB, Strojnik V, Podepecan A. Fatigue after 100 10.49 Joyner 9.53 short (100-m), medium (200-m) and long (400-m) treadmill 200 21.34 Joyner 9.37 0.98 sprints. European Journal of Applied Physiology Epub ahead of 400 47.60 koch 8.40 0.90 print. 2011. 800 1:53.28 kratochvilova 7.06 0.84 Track & Field News. 56(10): 9, 12, 17, 28, 30. 2003. 1500 3:50.46 Yunxie 6.51 0.92 Track & Field News. 57(10): 13, 15, 44, 47. 2004 Mile 4:12.56 Masterkova 6.37 0.98 Track & Field News. 58(9): 12, 18, 22, 37, 38, 42, 2005. 5000 14:11.15 Dibala 5.87 0.92 Track & Field News. 60(11): 12, 17, 20, 33, 36, 40, 2007. 10000 29:31.78 Junxie 5.64 0.96 Track &Field News. 61(8): 2008. Marathon 2:15:25 Radcliff 5.21 0.92 Track & Field News. 61(10): 10, 12, 14, 16, 20, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 53. 2008. Note the close relationship between the 100-200 and the 5000-1000 and the Track & Field News. 62(11): 8, 10, 15, 18, 33, 36. 2009. relatively loose relationship between the 800 and 400. Adapted from R.H. Track & Field News. 63(11): 15. 2010. Vaughan Principles of Training in Textbook of Running Medicine R.G O’Connor Track & Field News. 64(11): 7, 9, 11, 16, 32, 33, 37, 41. 2011. and RP Wilder eds. McGraw Hill, New York, 2001. Track & Field News. 64(11): 7, 9, 11, 16, 32, 33, 37, 41. 2011. Track & Field News. 64(12): 34. 2011. Usain Bolt 100m 10 meter splits. August 22, 2008. Speedendurance.com November 22, 2010. Vaughan RH. Principles of Training in Textbook of Running Resources Medicine R.G O’Connor and RP Wilder eds. McGraw Hill, New York, Baker Julian S. McCormick Marie Clare and Robergs Robert A. 2001. Interaction among skeletal muscle metabolic energy systems during Ward-Smith A.J., Radford P.F. Energy conversion rates during intense exercise. Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism 905612. 2010. sprinting with an emphasis on the performance of female athletes. Bekele10k World RecordZurich6/25/05IAAF GL Memorial Van Journal of Sports Science 18:835-43, 2000. Damme. YouTube video clip accessed February 9, 2012 Ward-Smith AJ and Radford PF. 2000 Investigation of the kinetics of Billat V, Hamar L, Koralsztein JP, Morton RH. Differential modeling anaerobic metabolism by analysis of the performance of elite sprinters of anaerobic and aerobic metabolism in the 800-m and 1,500-m run. Journal of Biomechanics. 33(8): 997-1004. 2000. Journal of Applied Physiology 107(2): 478-87. 2009. Westerblad, H., Bruton J.D., Katz, A. Skeletal muscle: energy metabo- Duffield R, Dawson B, Goodman C. Energy system contribution lism, fiber types, fatigue and adaptability. Experimental Cell Research to 100-m and 200-m track running events. Journal of Science and 316: 3093-9. 2010. Medicine in Sport 7: 302-13. 2004. Weyand, Peter G. and Mathew W. Bundle. Energetics of high speed Duffield R, Dawson B, Goodman C. Energy system contribution to running: integrating classical theory and contemporary observa- 400-metre and 800-metre track running. Journal of Sports Science 23: tions, American Journal of Physiology Regulatory Integrative and 299-307. 2005. Comparative Physiology 288: R956-R965., 31, 34. 2005. Duffield R., Dawson B, Goodman C. Energy system contribution to 1500- and 3000-meters track running. Journal of Sports Science 23: Dr. Robert Vaughan spent 18 years as an exercise physiologist at the 993-1002. 2005. Tom Landry Sports Medicine and Research Center. He coached such A Ferro, A Rivera, I Pagola, M Ferreruela, A Martin, V Rocambio. A notable athletes as five-time Olympian Francie Larrieu Smith as well kinematic studyof the sprint events at the 1999 World Championships as numerous other Olympic Trials qualifiers. He served as an assistant in athletics in Sevilla. ISBS 72-75. 2002. coach for the US Track & Field Team at the 2002 IAAF World Cup, the Gastin PB. Energy system interaction and relative contribution dur- 2002 Pan American Games, and was an assistant for the South Team at ing maximal exercise. Journal of Sports Medicine 31(10): 725-41. 2001. the US Olympic Festival in 1981 and 1982. Vaughan has been involved Green HJ. Mechanisms of muscle fatigue in intense exercise. Journal with USA Track and Field’s Elite Athlete project since 1987 and is an of Sports Science 15(3): 247-56. 1997. instructor for the USA Track & Field Level II and Level III Coaching Hassane Z, Georges J, Christophe J, Dominique D, Maitel Education program. B, Abderraouf BA, Jacques P, Elie M. Journal of Strength and

30 techniques may 2012

32 techniques may 2012

andreas v. maheras P HOTO the horizontal translation in discus throwing by andreas v. maheras, ph.d

n average, the forward linear momentum of the the thrower to generate vertical speed for the discus while the thrower-discus system contributes six percent of the leftover horizontal speed would help in the generation of the hori- horizontal speed of the discus at the moment of release, zontal speed of the discus (Maheras 2009). while the angular momentum around the vertical In reality though most throwers do not move that way. Figure axis contributes the remaining 94 percent (Maheras, 3 shows a typical path of the center of mass at the instant that 2008). Therefore, the contribution of the forward linear the discus reaches its most backwards point, at the take off of the Omomentum to the speed of the discus is quite small. However, right foot, at the take off of the left foot, at the landing of the right it is not negligible and warrants attention particularly during the foot, at the landing of the left foot and, at release. During the thrower’s action in the back of the circle. More specifically, dur- double-support phase at the back of the circle, throwers tend to ing the double-support phase in the back of the circle, the thrower shift the position of the center of mass of the system in a diagonal makes horizontal so-called “pull-push” forces against the ground fashion which, from the point of view of the thrower, expresses a (figure 1) and the ground reaction to those forces generate most of shift toward the left and backwards (front of circle). The mental the angular momentum around the vertical axis that the thrower image that the thrower may have is that of displacing the center of will need for the throw. Similarly, forward horizontal linear mass to a position more or less directly above the left foot, before momentum is generated in the early stages of the throw and it pushing off across the circle, but this does not usually occur (Hay makes the system translate horizontally across the circle (figure & Yu, 1996a, 1996b). Although this is the case, Hay & Yu (1996b) 2). An analogy can be used here to explain the purpose of giving addressed the fact that the closer the center of mass is to being forward linear momentum to the thrower-discus system. That is, in line with the left foot at take off in the back of the circle, the one can compare the discus thrower with a ship firing a cannon. less the probability of the thrower having the left foot too far to If the ship, firing the cannon, is traveling forward as the cannon is the side (in the bucket) during the release effort. It is rather com- fired, the forward speed of the ship is added to the forward speed mon then that, even with experienced throwers, the center of of the projectile. This results in a larger total horizontal speed of mass gets closer to the vertical of the left foot but does not reach the projectile as compared to a condition where the ship would it. Therefore, at the time that the left leg starts its main horizontal be stationary when it fired the cannon. The forward motion of thrust against the ground, the center of mass is ahead and to the the thrower-discus system contributes to the speed of the discus left of the position of the left foot (figure 4). Consequently, the at release and the thrower, indeed, needs to take advantage of this thrust of the left foot against the ground is not directly backwards (admittedly limited) forward motion as much as possible contri- but in a rather oblique direction backwards and toward the right. bution to the overall speed of the discus at release. The reaction force from the ground is forward and toward the left (figure 4). In turn this makes the system’s center of mass travel Ideal vs. Real Horizontal Translation of the System’s Center of Mass in an oblique direction across the throwing circle, that is, forward Ideally, it seems that during the double support phase in the and toward the left (figure 3). back of the circle, the thrower should shift the system’s center of mass to a position that is almost directly above the left foot, which Oblique vs. Direct Backward forces is the time that the thrower starts generating the system’s angular Since this type of action deviates from what may be ideal, the momentum around the vertical axis as she rotates counterclock- question arises as to what may be the disadvantage of such a wise. Following, after the thrower is facing towards the direction technique. Generally the oblique nature of the direction of the of the throw, she should thrust directly backward on the ground motion of the system’s center of mass should not present any with the left foot. This way, the large and slightly off-center ground problems for the generation of the vertical speed of the discus. As reaction force provides a large amount of linear momentum and long as the horizontal speed of the system is large, it should help additional angular momentum to the system. The thrower would the thrower obtain vertical linear momentum during the double- then translate directly forward across the circle. During the dou- support phase at delivery, regardless of whether the horizontal ble support delivery phase, the large horizontal linear momentum translation is directly forward or more oblique. of the system will enable the thrower to obtain upward linear On the other hand, there may be an issue for the generation of momentum at the expense of some loss of horizontal linear the horizontal speed of the discus. The more oblique the direc- momentum. The upward linear momentum would further enable tion of the motion of the system’s center of mass with respect

may 2012 techniques 33 the horizontal translation in discus throwing

Figure 1. “Push-Pull” forces, made by feet on the ground, generating angular momentum during the initial double support in the back of the circle. Figure 2. Forward linear momentum in the early stages of the throw. Figure 3. Approximate path of the center of mass at the instant: the discus reaches its most backwards point (1), at the take off of the right foot (2), at the take off of the left foot (3), at the landing of the right foot (4), at the landing of the left foot (5) and, at release (6).

tend to compensate for the size of the force. However, there may be a problem regarding the translation of the system. That is because the small size of the horizontal ground reaction force as shown in figure 5, would significantly reduce the horizontal speed of the system across the circle. This would tend to limit the contribution of the system’s linear momentum to the horizontal speed of the discus at release. Also, a lower speed of horizontal translation would also make it more difficult for the system to obtain upward lin- ear momentum during the delivery phase. A limited amount of upward linear momentum would result in a limited contribution to the vertical speed of the dis- cus at release. All in all, this approach does not seem promising (Dapena & Anderst, 1996). In good throwers (throwing between 58 and 60 meters), at the time the left foot loses contact with the ground in the back of the circle, the system’s center of mass is traveling horizontally at approximately 2.4 m/s. The direction of the motion is oblique, forward and toward the left at an angle of approximately 23 degrees to the left. During the airborne phase the direction of motion and the speed remain constant. During the single support on the right foot, there is a small loss of horizontal speed in the order of 0.4 m/s. During the left foot landing at the start of the delivery phase the horizontal speed of the system is at approximately 2.0 m/s and its direction of motion is roughly similar to that in the back of the circle dur- ing left foot take off. During the delivery phase the to the final horizontal direction of the motion of the discus after horizontal speed decreases further by another 0.7 m/s. release, the smaller the contribution of the horizontal speed of the By the time the discus is released the system’s center of mass has system to the horizontal speed of the discus at release. Considering a horizontal speed of 1.3 m/s. The direction of motion is similar the ship-cannon example described earlier, if the ship’s cannon to that in the back of the circle when the left foot took off from the does not fire directly forward but at an angle with respect to the ground at approximately 22 degrees. This loss of horizontal speed direction motion of the ship, the two speeds, the horizontal speed of the system’s center of mass during the delivery phase serves two of the ship and the oblique horizontal speed of the projectile rela- purposes: a) it prevents the thrower from fouling and b) it allows tive to the ship, do not exactly add up. Theoretically, this may pose the generation of upward linear momentum which is useful for the a problem for the thrower. generation of the vertical speed of the discus. Instead of pushing in an oblique fashion, a thrower may decide to push directly backward on the ground as shown in figure 5, in Divergence Angle opposition of what is shown in figure 4. If the thrower chooses In general then, the average horizontal direction of the motion of to do this when the system’s center of mass is forward and to the the system’s center of mass is in a diagonal direction forward and left of the position of the left foot, as it happens in most throws, toward the left. The horizontal direction of the motion of the dis- the force that the thrower will be able to exert on the ground cus after release varies but the average is four degrees and it points would be much smaller than if the push were made in the stan- forward and to the right. The difference between the two angles dard oblique direction shown in figure 4. This may not present indicates the divergence between the horizontal paths of the sys- a problem regarding the rotation of the system. That is because tem and that of the discus. The size of the divergence angle deter- the small ground reaction force as shown in the right of figure 5, mines how much of the horizontal speed that the system’s center points more off center with respect to the center of mass than the of mass had in the last quarter turn, effectively contributes to the oblique ground reaction force shown in figure 4. For the genera- horizontal speed of the discus. The larger the divergence angle, tion of the angular momentum around the vertical axis this would the greater the loss in the contribution of the horizontal speed of

34 techniques may 2012

the horizontal translation in discus throwing

Figure 4. Generation of linear momentum during the first single support in the back of the circle. It is generated by an off center ground reaction force passing to the right of the center of mass of the thrower+discus system. This would probably be the preferred technique during the drive to the middle of the circle. Figure 5. Hypothetical direct backward force that could be made on the ground by the left foot during the first single support in the back of the circle. The assumption here is that the center of mass of the thrower is not directly over the left foot. The forces depicted here are small and the execution of such technique would probably not be good.

the system to the horizontal speed of the discus and, consequently zontal drive across the circle in an oblique direction. In this case the greater the loss in the distance thrown. According to Dapena & it would not be a good idea to attempt to push directly backward Anderst (1996) the losses increase at first gradually up to -20 degrees on the ground as shown in figure 5, because the forces generated but at a higher rate after that value (the negative sign indicates that in this instant are too small and not optimal for linear momentum system’s center of mass is moving on average toward the left with generation. As long as the discus thrower drives across the circle respect to the eventual horizontal direction of the motion of the at a moderate oblique angle toward the left and does not throw the discus at release). If the divergence angle is kept within reasonable discus too far to the right so that the divergence angle does not reach levels the loss in distance is quite small. In an average 61.00-meter values beyond -20 degrees, there will not be a significant loss in the throw the contribution of the horizontal speed of the system to the distance thrown. Coaches should always be aware of the direction horizontal speed of the discus at release is at approximately 1.2 m/s, the thrower is moving across the circle, particularly in relation to the only 0.1 smaller than the horizontal speed of the center of mass at direction of the released discus. That is because if the divergence release which is at 1.3 m/s. Given an average horizontal speed of the angle reaches higher values, there can be significant losses in the discus at release at 19.3 m/s, the 0.1 m/s loss due to the divergence thrower’s performance. This implies that even in the case where the of the paths of the center of mass and of the discus is about one half left foot lands in the “bucket,” if the thrower is able to follow the left of one percent (0.1/19.3) of the total horizontal speed. In a hypothet- foot (move towards that direction) and throws towards that line, as ical throw in vacuum this would reduce the distance of the throw by experienced throwers do, then the thrower should be OK. Although about 0.30 meters in a 60-meter throw. In a real-life throw, with the in the majority of all discus throwers the center of mass never reach- all the aerodynamic forces that act on the discus, the loss would be es vertical over the left foot, the closer the center of mass is to being greater. The exact amount will depend on the wind and will result in line with the left foot at take-off in the back of the circle, the lower in a loss between 0.30 and 0.50 meters. On the other hand, when the probability of the thrower having the left foot too far to the side the divergence angle reaches –50 degrees, the loss of the horizontal (in the bucket) during the final release effort. speed due to the divergence is at an average of 0.46 m/s, and the loss in distance thrown is between 1.4 and 2.1 meters depending on the References aerodynamic forces. Dapena, J., & Anderst, W. (1997). Discus Throw (Men). Scientific Services Project, U.S.A Track & Field. Biomechanics Laboratory, Dept. Conclusions, Practical Application of Kinesiology, Indiana University. Experienced practitioners have always suggested that the discus Hay, J.G. & Yu, B. (1996a). Free leg action in throwing the discus. thrower a) pivot/transition/balance well over the left foot during the Track Coach, 134: 4265-4268. turn in the back of the circle and b) attempt to move in a generally Hay, J.G. & Yu, B. (1996b). Weight shift and foot placement in straight line across the circle. One of the reasons for this has to do throwing the discus. Track Coach, 135: 4297-4300. with the proper generation of forward linear momentum and the Maheras, A. (2009). Pros & Cons. The Grounded Release Method horizontal velocity of the system’s center of mass. Versus the Airborne Release Method in the Discus Throw. Techniques Ideally, the thrower should shift the center of mass to a position for Track and Field & Cross Country, 3 (2), 38-42. that is almost directly above the left foot, and then push directly Maheras, A. (2008). Momentum Development in Discus Throwing. backward on the ground to obtain a good drive directly forward NTCA Throwers Handbook, J.A. Peterson & Lasorsa R. editors, p.p. across the circle. However, the exact execution of this movement 132-136. is not practical. Coaches should avoid suggesting that the center of Dr. Andreas Maheras has been the throws coach at Fort Hays State mass strictly pass over the left foot. Therefore, if the thrower fails University since 2004. Maheras was a former member of the Greek to bring the center of mass close enough to the vertical of the left national team and has developed the FHSU throws programs into one foot, as most throwers do, the thrower should make a strong hori- of the elite in NCAA Division II.

36 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 37 USTFCCCA SUPPORTERS

www.mondoworldwide.com www.ucsspirit.com

www.beynonsports.com www.gillathletics.com

www.advpolytech.com www.balfour.com

www.coacheschoice.com www.brooksrunning.com

www.directathletics.com www.stockmeier-urethanes.com

Through their ongoing support of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Associaton, these companies demonstrate their strong commitment to the sports of Track & Field and Cross Country.

38 techniquestechniques may feb ruary2012 2012 USTFCCCA SUPPORTERS

www.ucsspirit.com

www.mfathletic.com

www.tractionusa.com

www.finishlynx.com

www.FTTF.com www.powerbar.com

www.vsathletics.com www.maxmedals.com

The USTFCCCA strongly encourages each member to purchase products and services from these supporters.

februarymay 20122012 techniquestechniques 39 sprinter needs analysis By Brandon Morton oto h p sun A

40 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 41 sprinter needs analysis

he universal question in all sports is how why it correlates well with the slower lifts associated with to become more powerful, faster and max-strength weight training. When the sprinter is in the stronger. This question is one I get asked upright position they are applying force at a faster rate and a lot by high school coaches and athletes so a different form of training is needed to enhance this in general. The first thing any coach portion of the race. Utilization of activities that are more needs to do when wanting to know how specific to the rate of force application in this phase is to get an end product is find out what’s needed, but that’s discussed later in this article. needed to get there. This is called forming a needs analysis, which is just finding out Simple Reactive Speed what you need to get what you want. You can apply this Reactive speed (“quickness” as referred to by some) is to anything but for the sake of this article we will look at a the ability of the central nervous system to contract, relax tneeds analysis for a 100m sprinter. or control muscle function. It’s measured as the time For a 100m sprinter to be successful there are many key interval or reaction time between the stimulus detection qualities that should be present. General and max strength, (starter pistol) and response execution (or initiation of simple reaction time, reactive strength, elastic strength or movement). It’s needed at the start of the race so that the power, absolute speed, speed endurance, coordination and sprinter is able to react to the sound of the gun in a quick posture are needed to be successful in the sprints. Some enough time so that they are not left behind in the blocks. of these qualities are endowed from childhood activity, Some sprinters aren’t the best reactors but this motor while others are made and enhanced through training. response can be sharpened. If a sprinter doesn’t have These characteristics must be applied at the same time and great reaction speed then it doesn’t mean he/she won’t over the course of the entire race. In his book Peak When win – but he/she certainly won’t get off to the best start. I It Counts: Periodization for Track and Field, William H. will train this response by using numerous reaction drills Freeman states that “the main physical qualities of an elite in which they must react and put the body thru the same sprinter are quickness, strength, and speed endurance.” range of motion as in the race. However, because this This is true, but I wanted to get a little bit more specific in is such a small percentage of the race I wouldn’t suggest my breakdown of what a sprinter needs to be successful. spending a large amount of time trying to improve simple reaction time. General and Max Strength One of the first requirements is a strong body or general Reactive Strength or Power strength. Everything from arms, legs, and core has to be Reactive strength is the key to success when the sprinter very strong. General strength is gained during the pre- is in the upright position on the way to the max speed season in the weight room and by improving the overall phase, during max speed maintenance, and the speed fitness level on the track. The lifts that help this particular endurance phase. To define it would be to say it’s the quality may or may not be specific to sprinting. Squats, stretch shortening cycle in a muscle where there is a build lunges, bench, pull-ups and other non-specific lifts are up in tension during the stretch phase and a release in utilized. energy and tension during the shortening phase. Basically, You will see a lot of track & field programs begin their reactive strength is like a rubber band effect. This cycle repetition range at about eight to 10 reps, but consider- happens in most athletic events but, for the sake of this ation needs to taken into account regarding body types article, I will attempt to show how it’s related to sprinting. and care should be exercised so excessive bulk in the body Prior to ground contact there is eccentric activity in the does not result. The entire body must work harmoniously hamstrings and gastroc-soleus muscles. This pretension together to produce a good race, so the entire body has to allows a reduction of slack in the system which sets up its be in good physical conditioning and very strong, so that ability to produce forces reactively upon ground contact. it can handle the stress of workouts in later phases of the This is immediately followed by a concentric or shorten- year. But this alone will not make you faster; it’s simply the ing cycle when the foot leaves the ground and energy cre- A in an ABC relationship. You have to add more things to ated during the eccentric phase is utilized to propel the your training regimen; this is the first step. body forward. This process is what’s used during jumps, In sprinting, initial acceleration is determined by stride and sprinting and many other actions (throwing footballs, length and not stride rate. This is achieved through a baseballs etc.). high level of explosive and maximum strength work for Rate of force application is a determinant of how well the muscles involved. Initial acceleration is a specific the acceleration phase and absolute speed phase goes. motor skill and is a different skill in and of itself (Yuri Basically the stretch shortening cycle has to happen in a V. Verkhoshansky). The speed of force application and short period of time. This is usually what’s missing from a direction are both different from what’s seen when the sprinter who is really strong in the weight room but is still body is in an upright position. When in the initial accel- running slow. When sprinting, the stretch shortening cycle eration phase your force application is slower, which is happens but, for slower sprinters, the ground times are

42 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 43 sprinter needsanalysis oto h p lab oto h p

SU T E

longer and the forces are not as high. apply as much force as possible in a very small amount of The purpose of this article isn’t to diagnose activities time. As proved by research (Weyand, Sternlight, Bellizzi, & that can improve the needs analysis capabilities, but I can’t Wright, 2000) humans reach higher running speeds faster resist giving some hints on how to improve the stretch not by repositioning their limbs more rapidly but by apply- shortening cycle. Plyometrics can be the added parameter ing greater support forces to the ground. Sprinters cannot in the equation to bridge work done in the weight room try to purposely push down harder on the ground to create with work done on the track. The most specific plyomet- power but instead the power applied to the ground should ric for sprinting is sprinting, but you can also do different be a byproduct of the stretch shortening cycle of the mus- bounds. Just be careful with the amount you are giving and cle and should occur when using natural and proper form. the time of season you give these workouts. They really If the sprinter tries to push harder than what’s natural drain the central nervous system. Now back to our needs then this will increase stride length but decrease stride rate analysis. My mentor, Campbell University head track and and causes him/her to sprint slower. If a sprinter tries to field coach Jim Patchell, always told me training is some- increase stride rate by quickening strides then this shortens times an A+B+C=D relationship. This means you had to stride length which will also cause him/her to sprint slower. add another activity to bridge the gap between two other This process has to be a natural occurrence, which is why I activities in order to get the desired effect you need. For always tell sprinters to just run as fast as they can and don’t example take A-weightroom work and combine it with do anything that doesn’t feel natural during the race. B-Plyometrics and you get C-improved elastic strength= D-faster sprinting. Remember the best plyometric for Absolute Speed sprinting is sprinting. Absolute speed is needed first and foremost to be a Power is force x speed and sprinters want to be able to sprinter. This is the top velocity a sprinter reaches dur-

44 techniques may 2012 may 2012 techniques 45 sprinter needs analysis

ing a race. In Sport Specific Speed authors Vern Gambetta through advanced sprint drills that will later help with a and Gary Winckler write that, in the track sprints, absolute sprinter’s form while running. You will see a lot of young speed is the ultimate determining factor in sprint success. sprinters have problems with drills when first starting off, Eccentric and concentric phases must be powerful and some eventually learn to properly perform the drills while rapid at this point of the race to keep the sprinter at top others don’t. When a sprinter learns to properly perform a drill, he/she can feel some patterns that may occur while running or he/she may feel positions they feel while run- Speed endurance is the ning. But mainly neuromuscular coordination is needed because as a sprinter becomes faster the time for a unified amount of time you can muscle contraction shortens. Repetitive sprint training requires the same motor patterns to be repeated over and stay at your top speed for over again. This allows neural pathways to become more and more established. Also, it’s needed for starts off the whatever race you’re doing. blocks. If athletes aren’t able to move the limbs quickly in the right sequences at controlled speeds then they could end up falling flat on their faces after the initial pushes. The only way to improve all of these is repetition of the activity. speed. It can be assured that with proper posture and bio- Let the athlete perform the action repeatedly and the first mechanics the sprinter will reach maximum velocity and be form of adaptation that occurs is motor coordination. So able to maintain it until fatigue sets in; at this point, some the practice of sprinting from blocks and standing starts, as sprinters form may break down, while others will be able well as running tempo runs, will improve all of these areas to maintain their forms. It all depends on the of physical of coordination. shape sprinters are in and how good their mechanics are. This can be a result of insufficient speed endurance work, Posture general muscles that weren’t strengthened enough in the In order to sprint efficiently and incorporate all muscles general conditioning phase or just bad coaching of the and body parts in the race that are required, the sprinter biomechanics of top-speed sprinting. Through top-speed must have proper posture and maintain it throughout the training and over-speed training we will look to improve race. The hip posture is straight up and down without any form, absolute speed and overall comfort at top speed. tilt forward or back. Unfortunately a lot of today’s kids aren’t playing outside but on the computer or on game Speed Endurance systems so they have poor posture from slouching in the Speed endurance is what a lot of people don’t realize couch. This is why these postural positions have to be is the true key to running fast. I remember that a lot of taught, even to some collegiate athletes. But the positions football players that went to high school with me used to will vary at different points of the race. They are trained always seem to think they were faster than me because of thru various drills such as a-skips and b-skips. To put it their 40-yard dash times, but they didn’t realize that if they simply, the head should be aligned with the spine which the can’t stay at those speeds then they would eventually get hips should be under, and the legs will cycle and push back left behind. Speed endurance is the amount of time you and downward into the ground. If all these needs are met, can stay at your top speed for whatever race you’re doing. then you should have a successful sprinter. For short sprints that speed would be maximal velocity, while for 400 meters it would be maximal desired veloc- References ity because in a 400-meter race you’re not trying to hit the Freeman, H. William. (2001) Peak When It Counts: highest speed possible but you’re choosing a speed ben- Periodization For American Track and Field 4th edition eficial for that distance. Work by Ushko and Vilcov (“The Gambetta, Vern & Winckler, Gary. (2001). Sport Specific Structure of Sprint Training,” n.d.) states that proper train- Speed. Sarasota, FL. Gambetta Sports Training Center. ing of the lactic and alactic systems is very important when Ushko, B. The Structure of Sprint Training. talking about speed endurance and also that the execution Verkhoshansky, V. Yuri. Quickness And Velocity In Sports of a large volume of glycolytic and anaerobic alactic train- Movements. ing loads leads to a substantial improvement of sprinting Weyand, S. B., Sternlight, Bellizzi, & Wright. (2000). speed and specific endurance. Alactic system is max effort Faster Top Running Speeds are achievedwith greater ground before exhaustion while lactic systems are when you are forces not more rapid leg movements. Journal of Applied trying to remain at top speed in the presence of exhaustion. Physiology , 1991-1999.

Coordination Brandon Morton is as an assistant track and field coach at Coordination is several parts acting together harmoni- East Tennessee State University. Morton works primarily with ously to produce an action. In this case the entire body the men’s and women’s sprints, hurdles, and relays. – arms, legs, abs, back etc. – will be working together to move the body down the track. Coordination is improved

46 techniques may 2012

2012 USTFCCCA national indoor COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR

Division I

Robert Johnson Mike Holloway Wayne Pate Mario Sategna Diamond Dixon Lawi Lalang Brianne Theisen Curtis Beach Oregon Florida Kansas Texas Kansas Arizona Oregon Duke Women’s Head COY Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

Division Ii

Jerry Baltes Tom Flood Amanda Putt Andrew Graham Lindsay Lettow Ryan Loughney Grand Valley State Grand Canyon Hillsdale Adams State Central Missouri Ashland Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

Division Iii

Marcus Newsom Frank Gramarosso Steve Johnson Pat Ebel Nevada Morrison Ben Scheetz Skye Morrison Christopher Roethel Wartburg North Central Wartburg UW-Oshkosh Wartburg Amherst Wartburg Christopher Newport Women’s Head COY Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

may 2012 techniques 49 DIVISION I 2012 USTFCCCA Regional indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year great lakes region

Susan Seaton Ron Helmer Christopher Bostwick Jeff Huntoon Christina Manning Andy Bayer Jasmine Cotton Japheth Cato Cincinnati Indiana Michigan State Indiana Ohio State Indiana Connecticut Wisconsin Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY mid atlantic region

Patrick Henner Fred Samara Chris Mittenberg Steve Dolan Emily Infeld Robby Creese Vanessa Henry Conor McCullough Georgetown Princeton Georgetown Princeton Georgetown Penn State Maryland – Eastern Princeton Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Shore Men’s Field AOY Women’s Field AOY midwest region

Gary Pepin Connie Price-Smith Wayne Pate Paul Thornton Diamond Dixon Harun Abda Jeneva McCall Erik Kynard Nebraska Southern Illinois Kansas Minnesota Kansas Minnesota Southern Illinois Kansas State Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY mountain region

Gregg Gensel Ralph Lindeman Cliff Felkins Ed Eyestone Nachelle Mackie Miles Batty Kelly Closse Cale Simmons Utah State Air Force Texas Tech BYU BYU BYU Texas Tech Air Force Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY

50 techniques may 2012 northeast region

Willy Wood Nathan Taylor Andrea Grove McDonough Gabe Sanders Lucy Van Dalen Jarret Eaton Rebecca O’Brien Robert Golabek Columbia Cornell Connecticut Boston University Stony Brook Syracuse Buffalo Buffalo Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

south region

Mike Holloway Bob Braman Dennis Nobles Jon Stuart Octavious Freeman Torrin Lawrence Krystal Schade Gray Horn Florida Florida State Florida State Georgia UCF Georgia Alabama Florida Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

south central region

Darryl Anderson Chris Bucknam Nic Petersen Mario Sategna Kristen Gillespie Akheem Gauntlett Whitney Gipson Damar Forbes TCU Arkansas TCU Texas Arkansas Arkansas TCU LSU Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

southeast region

Lawrence Johnson Dave Cianelli Timothy Vaught Greg Jack Dezerea Bryant Ryan Hill Tynita Butts Marcus Robinson Clemson Virginia Tech Charlotte Virginia Tech Clemson NC State East Carolina Virginia Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

west region

Edrick Floreal Greg Kraft Sheldon Blockburger James Li Katie Flood Lawi Lalang Brigetta Barrett Brianne Theisen Chris Benard Stanford Arizona State Arizona Arizona Washington Arizona Arizona Oregon Arizona State Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY COY

may 2012 techniques 51 DIVISION II 2012 USTFCCCA Regional indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year DIVISION II atlantic region

Dave Osanitsch George Williams Samantha Edwards Josh Edmonds Tabitha Bermis Christopher Shippensburg Saint Augustine’s Virginia State Saint Augustine’s Edinboro Copeland Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Saint Augustine’s Men’s Field AOY central region

Mike Thorson Mark Schuck Indira Spence Andrew Graham Barbara Szabo Oliver Harsanyi U-Mary Minnesota State Adams State Adams State Western State Western State Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

east region

Gary Gardner John Wallin Amy Varsell Selasi Lumax Brittany Brown Matthew Jeune Corey Thomas UMass Lowell Southern Connecticut Bentley Southern Connecticut Southern Connecticut New Haven Stonehill Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

midwest region

Jerry Baltes Marc Arce Amanda Putt John Guagenti Sam Lockhart Ryan Loughney Grand Valley State Findlay Hillsdale Findlay Grand Valley State Ashland Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

52 techniques may 2012 DIVISION II 2012 USTFCCCA Regional indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year DIVISION II

south region

Frank Hyland David Cain Latrice Johnson Chavis Taylor Tonish Delorch Andrew Cole Benedict Alabama-Huntsville Alabama-Huntsville Benedict Kentucky State Alabama-Huntsville Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

south central region

Victor Thomas Kip Janvrin Kirk Pedersen Chrystal Ruiz Laban Sialo Lindsay Lettow Darius Walker Lincoln Central Missouri Central Missouri Angelo State Central Missouri Central Missouri Central Missouri Women’s COY Men’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

southeast region

Matthew van Lierop Kate Griewisch Felix Duchampt Lauren Sloan Nazaire Saintine Mount Olive Lenoir-Rhyne Queens Anderson Lees-McRae Men’s and Women’s Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY

west region

Karl Lerum Tom Flood Shavine Hodges Tyler Sipes Ali Worthen Karlin Stewart Seattle Pacific Grand Canyon Grand Canyon Grand Canyon Seattle Pacific Grand Canyon Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

may 2012 techniques 53 DIVISION IIi 2012 USTFCCCA Regional indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year DIVISION IiI atlantic region

Stephen Patrick David Prevosti Markus Allen Joe Reed Sasha Henry Sean Bernstein Emma Dewart Wenley Louis SUNY Cortland SUNY Geneseo Buffalo State SUNY Oneonta Buffalo State SUNY Oneonta Ithaca SUNY Geneseo Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY central region

Marcus Newsom Steve Mathre Steve Johnson Pete Wareham Nevada Morrison Mike Hutton Skye Morrison Jonas Elusme Wartburg St. Thomas Wartburg St. Thomas Wartburg St. Thomas Wartburg Wartburg Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY great lakes region

Kevin Lucas Clyde Morgan Kevin Phipps Roger Busch Mary Mahoney Sutton Coleman Ashley Bault Brandon Eddy Mount Union Wabash Baldwin-Wallace Wabash Mount Union Rose-Hulman Marietta Baldwin-Wallace Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY mideast region

Not Pictured

Bobby Van Allen Tom Donnelly Gary Aldrich Sheena Crawley Jordan Schilit Abigail Schaffer Justin Turner Johns Hopkins Haverford Carnegie Mellon Franklin & Marshall Haverford Moravian Gwynedd-Mercy Women’s COY Men’s COY Men and Women’s Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY Assistant COY

54 techniques may 2012 DIVISION IIi 2012 USTFCCCA Regional indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year DIVISION IiI

midwest region

Not Pictured

Josh Buchholtz Brian Woodard Pat Ebel Christy Cazzola Dan Sullivan Melissa Norville Pete Delzer UW-La Crosse Monmouth UW-Oshkosh UW-Oshkosh UW-Stevens Point Illinois College UW-Oshkosh Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY Women’s COY

new england region

Mathew Lemaire Al Fereshetian Nicole Wilkerson Margo Cramer Ben Scheetz Tanasia Hoffler David Pless Worcester State Bates Middlebury Middlebury Amherst Williams Bates Women’s COY Men’s COY Men’s and Women’s Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY Assistant COY

south/southeast region

Duane Ross Doug Thomasey Maddy Outman Denver Davis Carmen Graves Alexander Tallman Elizabeth Krug Richard Roethel Methodist Lynchburg Emory Bridgewater Roanoke Washington and Lee Hendrix Christopher Newport Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY COY

west region

Not Pictured

Travis Olson Toby Schwarz Bob Omlin Derek DeWindt Alexis Arnold Trent Alsin Catherine Street Carter Comito Linfield Whitworth Whitworth Whitworth George Fox Whitworth Linfield Whitworth Women’s COY Men’s COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

may 2012 techniques 55 site, www.eligibilitycenter.org, I will provide details regarding what a future student-athlete must do to get eligible.

Full Qualifier. In order to receive athletics aid (scholarship), practice and com- pete in their first year, students will need to complete 16 core courses in the following areas: 4 years of English; 3 years math at Algebra I level or higher; 2 years natural or physical science (one lab if offered at any high Updates school attended); 1 year additional English, math or natural/physical science; 2 years social science; and from the 4 years additional from areas above or foreign language, philoso- phy or comparative religion. Have a minimum required GPA of 2.300 in the 16 core courses NCAA mentioned above. Graduate from high school. Meet the requirements of the competition sliding scale. Meaning, Eligibility you must have a minimum sum ACT or SAT (critical reading and math only) score that matches the 16 core course GPA on the scale. This scale can be found at the NCAA Eligibility Center’s website, www.eligibilitycenter.org, Center One of the new requirements relates to the progression in which core coursework must be completed. Future Division I student- athletes must complete 10 core courses before the seventh semester of high school (e.g., senior year), and of those 10 core courses com- by pleted, seven must be in the area of English, math or science. For john pfeffenberger purposes of the GPA calculation for NCAA academic certification, the 10 core courses become “locked in” for the purpose of the calcu- lation. This means that students need to start working hard early in high school to do well on their core-course requirements.

ith many new changes in the NCAA’s rules on a year-to- Academic Redshirt. year basis, it can sometimes be difficult to understand The same 16 core course requirements must be met in order to be what you need to know as a future student-athlete or deemed an Academic Redshirt. coach. In this quarter’s edition of Updates from the The key difference between the Academic Redshirt and the Full WNCAA Eligibility Center, we will focus on some very important topics Qualifier lies in the GPA. A minimum GPA of 2.000 in 16 core cours- related to changes in initial-eligibility academic standards for those es is necessary to become an Academic Redshirt. student-athletes that plan to enroll at NCAA Division I institutions in The GPA and SAT/ACT score must also meet the requirements of the Fall of 2015 or later. the sliding scale for an academic redshirt. This information again can be found on the NCAA Eligibility Center’s website: www.eligi- Who will these new requirements impact? bilitycenter.org. The new initial-eligibility academic requirements will impact high If a future student-athlete does not meet Full Qualifier status, school students who enroll full time at an NCAA Division I college or but qualifies for the Academic Redshirt, he/she can practice during university on or after August 1, 2015. his/her first term at a Division I college or university. After the first semester or quarter is complete, in order to continue to practice for What are the possible outcomes for future student-athletes the rest of the year, the student must be academically successful at who fall under these new requirements? the collegiate level. There are three possible categories that a future student-athlete may fall under based on this new academic standard. These catego- Nonqualifier. ries are: A nonqualifier is a college-bound student-athlete that does not Full qualifier: Eligible for competition, athletics aid (scholarship) and meet either set of requirements. A nonqualifier cannot receive practice the first year; athletics aid during the first year at an NCAA Division I college or Academic redshirt: Eligible for athletics aid the first year, practice in first university and cannot practice or compete during the first year at a regular academic term (semester or quarter), but no competition; Division I college or university. Nonqualifier: Not eligible for athletics aid, practice or competition the For additional information regarding NCAA Division I’s new first year. initial-eligibility academic requirements, visit the NCAA Eligibility Center’s website or call the NCAA customer service staff at 877-262- What does this mean? 1492. Instead of providing comparative changes to the current academic For feedback, questions, comments and suggestions for future requirements, from the NCAA Guide to the College-Bound Student- topics from the NCAA Eligibility Center, please contact John Athlete, which can be found on the NCAA Eligibility Center’s web- Pfeffenberger at [email protected].

56 techniques may 2012