Saturday 21 July 2012

[Supertraining] Digest Number 4595

7 New Messages

Digest #4595
1a
1b
Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments? by "CoachJ1@aol.com" coachj12002
1c
2a
Re: Prilepin's Table & Supertraining? by "brandong" cccp920292002
3a
Re: Periodised programme for Volleyball by "brandong" cccp920292002
3b
Re: Periodised programme for Volleyball by "Giovanni Ciriani" gciriani
3c
Re: Periodised programme for Volleyball by "todd_gaudreau@yahoo.com" todd_gaudreau

Messages

Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:38 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Giovanni Ciriani" gciriani

Ralph,
Whether strap-ob blades would confer an advantage to able-bodied athletes,
would depend on how well these strap-on blades work.
Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@yahoo.com> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Linda wrote:
> The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items
> which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport.
> However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes
> may use or not use at their own discretion.
>
> This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began to
> think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by
> able bodied runners. Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied
> athlete?
>
> Ralph Giarnella MD
> Southington Ct. USA
>
> ________________________________
> From: "deadliftdiva@comcast.net" <deadliftdiva@comcast.net>
> To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:13 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?
>
>
>
> Really a good point, Ken -
>
> The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the
> persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be
> allowed in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe
> technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the
> governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it
> is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion,
> and that is where it differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.
>
> The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who
> apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to
> whether they are "for" or "against" the athlete in question... it cannot
> have been an easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the
> controversy and all the media attention this case has prompted.
>
> the Phantom
> aka Linda Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter
> Denver, Colorado, USA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: CoachJ1@aol.com
> To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:43:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?
>
> Lost in all the controversy surrounding Oscar Pistorius is the fact that
> nobody on the Rice research team took a "position" on whether or not he
> should be competing in able bodied competition.
>
> As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position
> statement:
>
> "Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect
> Oscar Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an
> athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a
> protracted,
> public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are
> "for"
> Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are "against" him, we are, in
> fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius
> should be
> eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists
> our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our
> scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may
> or
> may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to
> the policy makers."
>
> Ken Jakalski
> Lisle High School
> Lisle, IL USA
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:38 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"CoachJ1@aol.com" coachj12002

Hi Ralph!


:>This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began
to think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by
able bodied runners. Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied
athlete?

There are all kinds of factors to consider what a spring-like device would
do for an able bodied sprinter.

One of the more significant would be changing limb length.

For example, double below the knee amputees like Pistorius have an
advantage over single leg btk's like Marlon Shirley. The advantage is based on
the fact that a double btk can manipulate the length of the prosthesis, ie.,
run "taller." This was one of the complaints single btk's like Shirley
suggested Pistorius was doing a few years back.

I know this sounds crazy, but this led to speculation that someone ,
somewhere would turn to a single btk and explore the possibilities of removing
the intact limb, since the double btk would have the ability to adjust limb
length.

Ken Jakalski
Lisle Senior HS (ret)
Lisle, Illinois USA

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:39 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"deadliftdiva@comcast.net"

I don't think the question is silly at all. But I think it would not confer the same benefits to the athlete in some ways - some of the mechanical "advantage" in the springiness perhaps, but I'd also expect the meat athlete would have more wind resistance still due to the larger leg muscles for one thing? It might also be a more "upright" running style?

The latter part isn't as much a worry after seeing Michael Johnson succeed with his unique and very upright style.

I guess this leaves the other question - would a non amputee elite runner be able to maximize the full potential of a blade footwear? Would the extra functioning joint (ankle) inhibit its use?

Would also fully meat athletes be able to and possibly rightly petition for the allowance of a "spring shoe" to "level the playing field"? A shoe rather than a blade added onto a shoe - that incorporates a sort of springboard type mechanism to aid the runner?

When we examine change in a sport, I always think back to the gymnastics - "women's gymnastics" starting out mostly as a styled dance on the floor exercise - and then turning more and more into a teenage endeavor of tiny girls with springloaded floors and double and triple moves... without the spring loaded floor, the moves are not likely even with the tiny and steely conditioned athletes we have today.

Is running behind for not adding a similar technology?

The Phantom
aka Linda Schaefer, RMT/CMT, competing powerlifter
Denver, Colorado, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Giarnella" <ragiarn@yahoo.com>
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:38:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Linda wrote:
The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion.

This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began to think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by able bodied runners. Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied athlete?

Ralph Giarnella MD
Southington Ct. USA

________________________________
From: " deadliftdiva@comcast.net " < deadliftdiva@comcast.net >
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Really a good point, Ken -

The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be allowed in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion, and that is where it differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.

The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to whether they are "for" or "against" the athlete in question... it cannot have been an easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the controversy and all the media attention this case has prompted.

the Phantom
aka Linda Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter
Denver, Colorado, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: CoachJ1@aol.com
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:43:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Oscar Pistorius is the fact that
nobody on the Rice research team took a "position" on whether or not he
should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

"Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect
Oscar Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an
athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,
public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are "for"
Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are "against" him, we are, in
fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be
eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists
our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our
scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or
may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to
the policy makers."

Ken Jakalski
Lisle High School
Lisle, IL USA

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:46 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"brandong" cccp920292002



--- In Supertraining@yahoogroups.com, Jon Haddan <jon_haddan@...> wrote:
>
> I have heard two different versions of how the table
> was developed. The first version states that Prilepin
> collected data from the training logs of more than
> 1000 World, Olympic, National and European
> weightlifting champions (sometimes this version just
> mentions Russian lifters) and the table represents a
> consensus of training practices. The second version
> is that he conducted experiments with junior lifters
> and then applied his results to national team members
> in developing the table.
>
> Like much of the Russian "field work" of that era,
> there does not seem to be any data on what was done or
> how the conclusions were reached. No one ever cites
> anything published about the use or development of the
> table, just the table itself.
>
> Does anyone know what the real story is?
>
> People apply the table to non-Olympic lifts even
> though everyone seems to acknowledge that the table
> was based off of Olympic lifts. There never seems to
> be a clear statement that Prilepin or other Russian
> weightlifting coaches applied the table to non-Olympic
> lifts. I find this odd since my understanding of
> Russian training at the time (70's and 80's) was that
> it involved a lot of ancillary lifts at least compared
> to the subsequent Bulgarian approach. One would think
> then that ancillary lift rep/set/weight schemes would
> have been addressed directly.
>
> Jon Haddan
> Irvine, CA
>
********** Prilepin's table and how it was acquired in in one of the back issues of the Soviet sports review. From what i recall it was at the "half power point" in other words when the lifts began to drop in power output by half that set the limit on the number of reps and sets
This was a very crude yardstick for work capacity as it was group data from a wide range of individuals covering a series of exercises. A tendo unit and individualization would proof much more useful.
Brandon Green
Lompoc, CA

Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:46 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"brandong" cccp920292002



--- In Supertraining@yahoogroups.com, "Jon" <jeasdown@...> wrote:
>
> Hello all
>
> I was wondering how one might structure a plan for a volleyball player.
>
> What specific tests one might use to monitor progress of key performance variables specific to the biomechanical and metabolic demands of the sport in question.
>
> I was thinking along the lines of RM back squat as max strength in the squat is highly correlated with vertical jump performance.
>
> To test speed strength perhaps a clean/snatch from the hip. However, what to do if the athlete is not yet technically proficient in the aforementioned exercise?
>
> Would a vertical jump test be the most valid as vertical jump performance is going to be a direct predictor of physical ability related to volleyball?
>
> Am I correct in thinking that a similar height recorded between a static 90 degree VJ and CMJ would indicate a high rate of force development and signify a need for more maximal strength training?
>
> Which agility tests would be valid to test a volleyball players movement? Namely that of an athlete playing the power position/spiker.
>
> Also, I am a little unsure of where to place plyometric training into the program, and which exercises to start with if the athlete has no prior experience with jump training let alone minimal ground contact time SSC activities. Could you start the athlete off with low intensity drills in during GPP and begin to advance to more intensive drills during the SPP or when the athlete shows competence in the easier exercises?
>
> I apologize if this post is asking too much. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks for everyone's time.
>
> Jon Easdown
> London
>
I saw the USSR volleyball team in LA in the 80's. Their warmup made them look like they were a bunch of acrobats. Gymnastics and acrobatics are excellent gpp for volleyball (as well as other sports). The Oly lifts might not be too bad with the coordination and power requirements. For aerobic fitness basketball would not be too bad.Track is without peer for speed.
Brandon Green
Lompoc,CA.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:39 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Giovanni Ciriani" gciriani

IMHO although maximum force positively correlates with jump height, I think
the power necessary for a high jump is performed at a much higher velocity
and lower load. Therefore a test involving lifting of heavy weights (low
speed) would not gauge the degree of athletic performance necessary for a
jump.
Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT 06110 - USA

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Brock Leggins <brockleggins@hotmail.com>wrote:

> **
>
>
>
> Jon, if you're looking to see how high they jump, test vertical jump. You
> can do with or without countermovement, with a 1- or 3-step approach, etc.
> If you want to use the squat as a training movement, by all means do so
> (and you will probably want to test it also for that reason), but don't
> test it as a measure of their jumping ability.As for agility tests, you can
> use standard T-tests or pro agility if you wish, which may have some
> standards or norms which you could compare your athletes' times to, or you
> can devise your own agility test which you feel more accurately reflects
> the needs of the players. Just make sure this is the same test you use
> every time you test them on agility/change of direction, as that is the
> only way to know if they are improving.In terms of jumping, I guess it
> depends on both biological and training age of the athletes, but I'm a big
> fan of Al Vermeil's quote that "if you're going to teach them to run, you
> better teach them to slow down. If you're going to teach them to jump, you
> better teach them to land." In other words - teach proper landing mechanics
> first (in my opinion). Also remember that many activities fit the
> plyometric mold - even things like skipping and hopping, provided ground
> contact time is kept short.
> Brock LegginsNorwalk, IA
>
> To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
> From: jeasdown@yahoo.co.uk
> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 19:57:27 +0000
> Subject: [Supertraining] Periodised programme for Volleyball
>
>
> Hello all
>
> I was wondering how one might structure a plan for a volleyball player.
>
> What specific tests one might use to monitor progress of key performance
> variables specific to the biomechanical and metabolic demands of the sport
> in question.
>
> I was thinking along the lines of RM back squat as max strength in the
> squat is highly correlated with vertical jump performance.
>
> To test speed strength perhaps a clean/snatch from the hip. However, what
> to do if the athlete is not yet technically proficient in the
> aforementioned exercise?
>
> Would a vertical jump test be the most valid as vertical jump performance
> is going to be a direct predictor of physical ability related to volleyball?
>
> Am I correct in thinking that a similar height recorded between a static
> 90 degree VJ and CMJ would indicate a high rate of force development and
> signify a need for more maximal strength training?
>
> Which agility tests would be valid to test a volleyball players movement?
> Namely that of an athlete playing the power position/spiker.
>
> Also, I am a little unsure of where to place plyometric training into the
> program, and which exercises to start with if the athlete has no prior
> experience with jump training let alone minimal ground contact time SSC
> activities. Could you start the athlete off with low intensity drills in
> during GPP and begin to advance to more intensive drills during the SPP or
> when the athlete shows competence in the easier exercises?
>
> I apologize if this post is asking too much. Any help would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks for everyone's time.
>
> Jon Easdown
>
> London
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:39 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"todd_gaudreau@yahoo.com" todd_gaudreau

Check out www.plyotruth.com. Its a great website from the Norwegian National Volleyball
Teams head coach.

Todd Gaudreau
Williston,ND
USA
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "brandong" <cccp920292002@yahoo.com>
Sender: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 17:40:43
To: <Supertraining@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Supertraining] Re: Periodised programme for Volleyball

--- In Supertraining@yahoogroups.com, "Jon" <jeasdown@...> wrote:
>
> Hello all
>
> I was wondering how one might structure a plan for a volleyball player.
>
> What specific tests one might use to monitor progress of key performance variables specific to the biomechanical and metabolic demands of the sport in question.
>
> I was thinking along the lines of RM back squat as max strength in the squat is highly correlated with vertical jump performance.
>
> To test speed strength perhaps a clean/snatch from the hip. However, what to do if the athlete is not yet technically proficient in the aforementioned exercise?
>
> Would a vertical jump test be the most valid as vertical jump performance is going to be a direct predictor of physical ability related to volleyball?
>
> Am I correct in thinking that a similar height recorded between a static 90 degree VJ and CMJ would indicate a high rate of force development and signify a need for more maximal strength training?
>
> Which agility tests would be valid to test a volleyball players movement? Namely that of an athlete playing the power position/spiker.
>
> Also, I am a little unsure of where to place plyometric training into the program, and which exercises to start with if the athlete has no prior experience with jump training let alone minimal ground contact time SSC activities. Could you start the athlete off with low intensity drills in during GPP and begin to advance to more intensive drills during the SPP or when the athlete shows competence in the easier exercises?
>
> I apologize if this post is asking too much. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks for everyone's time.
>
> Jon Easdown
> London
>
I saw the USSR volleyball team in LA in the 80's. Their warmup made them look like they were a bunch of acrobats. Gymnastics and acrobatics are excellent gpp for volleyball (as well as other sports). The Oly lifts might not be too bad with the coordination and power requirements. For aerobic fitness basketball would not be too bad.Track is without peer for speed.
Brandon Green
Lompoc,CA.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

GROUP FOOTER MESSAGE
Modify/cancel your subscription at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups

Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!

[marriagerestoration] ANOTHER RESTORATION - Jul 21, 2012 - Doreen's Daily Delights

 

From: ___________son (____son@yahoo.com)
Sent: Fri 7/20/12 11:28 AM
To: marriagerestoration@msn.com

Praise God, Pastor Doreen, my husband is home. Yes, he is home.
Praise God. He threatened divorce and told me he was finished, but
after so much prayers, he changed his mind and has decided to
return to the marriage.

Thank You Pastor Doreen for your encouraging words and coundeling. I have in the last year learned how to completely submit my heart, my marriage and my husband into the Lords hands.

I have a closer relationship with my God. My husband came home this
week and I was so surprised. God has done a MIRACLE in our marriage.

I can't begin to explain. I am so thankful and I lift up praises every
time I think of the goodness of Jesus. I have a great living testimony!

I will keep you up to date. We are going on vacation.

Thank the Lord and God Bless!

Name withheld

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
https://www.paypal.com/

Telephone Counseling: Licensed Marriage Counselor. In addition to daily encouragement, I also offer telephone counseling in order to help support the Ministry. I do not charge a fee, but a donation to the Ministry would be appreciated.

Yahoo Site: www.marriagerestorationministries@yahoogroups.com

Website: http://marriagerestorationministries.org/

Email address: marriagerestoration@msn.com

All Rights Reserved.  No part of Doreen's Daily Delights may be republished or reprinted on other Websites without her permission.
.

__,_._,___

Friday 20 July 2012

[Supertraining] Digest Number 4594

1 New Message

Digest #4594
1a

Message

Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:14 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Ralph Giarnella" ragiarn

Linda wrote:
The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion.

This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began to think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by able bodied runners.  Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied athlete?

Ralph Giarnella MD
Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________
From: "deadliftdiva@comcast.net" <deadliftdiva@comcast.net>
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?


 
Really a good point, Ken -

The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be allowed in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion, and that is where it differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.

The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to whether they are "for" or "against" the athlete in question... it cannot have been an easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the controversy and all the media attention this case has prompted.

the Phantom
aka Linda Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter
Denver, Colorado, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: CoachJ1@aol.com
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:43:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Oscar Pistorius is the fact that
nobody on the Rice research team took a "position" on whether or not he
should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

"Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect
Oscar Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an
athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,
public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are "for"
Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are "against" him, we are, in
fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be
eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists
our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our
scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or
may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to
the policy makers."

Ken Jakalski
Lisle High School
Lisle, IL USA

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We are making changes based on your feedback, Thank you !
The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog
GROUP FOOTER MESSAGE
Modify/cancel your subscription at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups

Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!