Pages

Saturday, 8 June 2013

just a dumb coach...



Christian Malcolm is smarter than me.  

As hard as it is for me to admit that, it is true.  

Dwain Chambers is also smarter than me.  So is Marlon Devonish.  And Kaillie Humphries.  And Katie Uhlaender.  Akeem Haynes.  Steve Mesler.  Glenn Smith.  And a few hundred other folk who have had the (dis?)pleasure of my coaching company over the last 21 years.  

I think for the most part I fooled them all...but it’s all just smoke and mirrors, really.  I’m a sham.  A pretender.  I’ve just pretended to know what’s best for them.  All the time afraid that they would find out the truth.  

I may come across like I know better.  

...that I have a plan.  

A periodized plan even... 

But...I don’t


All I really have is a guess.

Based on what they tell me...what I see...what I know...what I think...

But the one piece of information that I am lacking...The only piece that really matters...I do not have:

“How does the athlete feel”?

I can ask.  I can monitor.  I can devise elaborate questionnaires.  I can even use the latest and greatest....HRV, TMG, etc...

But all it will give me is a picture of how the athlete might feel.  



“the athlete can feel, but cannot see.  The coach can see, but cannot feel”
...and that pretty much sums it up.  


If a coach cannot feel what the athlete feels, then how can we accurately predict how he is going to adapt?  How can we pretend we know more than the athlete?

My argument is - we can’t!
...or at least I can’t...



So until that magical, mystical day when I can transpose myself into the athletes’ soul, and feel what they can feel....I will just...

guess...


...actually, to make myself feel a little smarter, I call it a ‘hypothesis’.  

You remember the grade-school definition of a hypothesis?  

“an educated guess”

not just pulled out of thin air: it is based on...
research, the athlete's experience, my experience, whatever monitoring we have done, etc. 

all this comes together to inform the narrative which drives my hypothesis.  


...my guess of how the athlete will adapt to the ‘stress’ that I place upon them...


and then

Based on this hypothesis, I run an experiment - i.e. the training program.  


At the end of the experiment (a training block), I use the new information we have gained through these new experiences, and form a new hypothesis, and begin the process over again.  

By the way, this process necessitates a completely individualized program.  I simply cannot understand coaches who apply one-size-fits-all programming.  Every athlete is different.  Every athlete has a different stress-adaptation response. Every athlete requires an individual program.  


Planning

I have been guilty in the past of coming up with these super-elaborate, beautiful-looking plans that I have spent months on - sitting in my basement like some mad scientist.  Then, when the time comes to run the program, I feel like I’m so emotionally tied to the plan, that I have trouble deviating.  

We see this all the time.  

Emotional commitment to something we have spent a lot of time, money, or energy on is a huge problem - not only for coaches, but in every industry, and in every part of our lives.  

There’s even a name for it:

Sunk Cost Fallacy

(essentially, the irrational commitment to a poor ‘investment’.  The more you’re invested, the more difficult it is to abandon it.  Read Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow and Ariely’s Predictably Irrational for great insight into loss aversion and sunken costs).

"Sunk costs drive wars, push up prices in auctions and keep failed political policies alive. The fallacy makes you finish the meal when you are already full. It fills your home with things you no longer want or use. Every garage sale is a funeral for someone’s sunk costs".
- David McRaney


It’s a difficult thing to admit to.  It’s basically admitting to our fallibility.  It’s one thing to admit to a mistake that you have already made... 

...it’s another thing altogether to admit to a mistake that you have yet to make!  
- doubly difficult for the oversized ego...

But somehow, that’s what I have managed...
...a few years ago, I began to write my programs a little differently.  Instead of detailed planning - often months in advance - I prescribed broad ranges.  Varied exercise options.  Loading alternatives.  


Some Structure

But there is still some organization to this process...
I approach it thusly (again, credit to Mladen Jovanovic for the inspiration for the ‘zoom levels’)

  • Philosophy - this is mine.  It is not influenced by the individual athlete I may be coaching.  It is based on my experiences.  My knowledge.  This is where I am smarter than the athlete.  It may meander over time and circumstance, but on the whole, it is pretty fixed.  

  • Plan - again, this is mainly influenced by me, and is based primarily upon my experiences.  The plan is essentially the components of the program.   On the hole, for 90% of the people 90% of the time, this is determined by me.

  • Periodization - the manner in which we organize the plan (components): this will be semi-influenced by the athlete - especially in cases where they may have school, work commitments, etc.  If I have experience with an athlete and we have had good success within that experience with a differently-organized structure, then we may ‘periodize’ things differently.  Athletes have different loading capabilities, so we may have to organize schemes differently to fit their specific abilities, etc.  

  • Program - what the athlete does on any given day.  And this is where the athlete becomes smarter than me. 

Much smarter. 

And this is difficult to admit to.  The pendulum that swings between the coach and the athlete finally swings all the way across.  It’s time for the coach to step out of the way, and allow the athlete to express whatever it is they are capable of on that particular day.  

I really can’t stress that point enough:
get out of the way!


It is not a free-for-all, however... 

But if it exists within the philosophy, the plan, and the periodization, then the athlete runs the show.   Auto-regulation to the maximum.  While keeping within the main structure, we best take advantage of the day to day fluctuations that we cannot predict by remaining super-fluid on daily programming (what Mel Siff called 'cyber-kinetic periodization'). 


I tend not to normally write about the details of what we do in training - not because I am secretive about it, but because I feel it is important that every coach find their own way.  There’s far too much blind copying in this business.  As I have written before, if you know the why, you can figure out the what.  Without the why, though, you’re just lost.  

But, I thought I’d share at least a picture of how I write the programming portion of the plan...tune in next time for the details...

..........

if you enjoyed this post, please share it on 
Twitter or Facebook...thanks

13 comments:

  1. Very big of you to admit this Stu, and we are all proud of you!

    You are absolutely correct that for a well designed program to become truly successful, the athlete in question must be an active day to day participant. In part this requires the coach to do some digging. Engage with the athlete; ask questions, watch their warm-up and movement quality, monitor their energy levels, and pay attention to their moods.

    On the flip side, athletes, please help your coach in this process through effective two-way communication. Let us know how you feel, what you think, and what you like/dislike. And yes, sometimes that means more than just one word responses such as good, bad, or tight. Work together as a team.

    Individuals win races, teams win championships.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. some important points there Dustin...thanks

      Delete
  2. I was waiting for this one. Great post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great article. No one knows how they (the athletes) are feeling. Its just a simple guess based on observation.

    Communication is key. Regardless of the profession. The more we talk it out, the better we will become, on both ends.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great read. Will share. Im no great athlete but I know listening to my coach and the fact that I tell him everything especially how I feel makes our training and relationship much stronger. No point having a coach if he/she doesn't understand you.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is the most honest post I've ever read by a coach on the internet. Makes me feel like I'm not the only one that screws up, guesses, and doesn't always know. Makes me feel even better that even the best coaches look at "not knowing" as an inherent part of the plan. I love that idea. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. glad it resonated with you E...thanks for reading!

      Delete
  7. Many thanks for this. I coach disabled equine riders up to international podium level and there is a constant discussion about the feel of the athlete against what the judges see. Also in some cases (not all) its harder for a disabled athlete to plan the effective training of the horse. I now use this blog as an intragral part of the discussion.

    Clive Milkins FRDA

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wouldn't it be great if you could be a skin-changer like in Game of Thrones.....cept step into your athletes? :D

    ReplyDelete