Hello everyone and happy Friday eve (Thursday). Today I want to talk about something I've noted over the last 5-6 years, movements that proper Strength and Conditioning coaches should nail, but amateur coaches (sport coaches trying to be strength coaches mostly) should leave the hell alone.

Usually, these types are movements that a strength coach (trainer) should be able to coach someone up on in a session, maybe two, no more. The top culprits are below, you’ll notice they all belong to one pattern of movement.

KB Swings (snatches, cleans too)- Most want to have their athletes do swings because they know the benefits, BUT could not coach them with worse form though. I believe, when push comes to shove, a quality strength coach should be able to coach this movement up in a session at most. Me personally, I do like to progress and build them up over time, still, if you held my feet to the fire, I could get it done in a day, any of my colleagues as well.
 
1-Leg RDLs- These are problematic mostly because athletes, without the proper coaching, try to rush them, because they are too busy trying to not fall over. These are absolutely a necessity in an athlete’s program, however there are some variations, pregressions and so on, that are more appropriate for the super balance challenged out there. While I believe I can get most people to do a 1-Leg RDL without looking like Bambi, the go to movements to dial things back on are at my finger tips, simply because I've been doing it for a bit, as it should be for most strength coaches.
 
Deadlifts- Super important lift for any athlete here, no denying it, and holy brain farts do I see them butchered with little to no correction from coaches (again not my colleagues that are proper coaches). Credit to them for knowing the value, an F for execution and not thinking about getting help. More often than not, the lift gets super squatty OR the proper variation for the athlete isn’t applied, ever. Too many coaches die on the hill of certain variations being trash over others. If it fits the person, it should be on the table. Kettlebell, trap bar, barbell, sumo stance, conventional stance, elevated, and on and on. Know the variations, know where people need to start, regardless of what they tell you, and know where to go should things start to get wonky. Easy for a strength coach, not so easy for the amateur (or sport coach).
 
*Olympic Lifts- These aren’t quite in the same category, but they’re almost in the same category (so you don’t f**in hit em…anyone?) I see way too many amateur coaches thinking they can coach cleans and snatches, cleans mostly. To be honest, I’m probably only coaching cleans, if either of them, and I used to be much better with both. This poses the question, if I'm a bit gun shy with these, having 10+ years in the field, why the hell do rookies (or pseudo strength coaches) think it’s wise to unleash their athletes (or clients) with them?
 
The solution to them all is ask someone to help coach. Honestly, I myself would jump at the chance if someone either reached out or walked up to me for help coaching. There’s no gate keeping here friends, everyone needs a bit a help so people don’t walk away in serious pain. Thanks for reading friends and if you know this type of stuff is happening to other athletes, I'd highly encourage a conversation between yourself and the sport coach...or just hire someone like me for your athlete. Happy Thursday fam!

Hi again friends, back with more fun to end the week for you! After a couple of convos with my clients this week on this topic, I figured this would be a good bit to write about. I like rep ranges and here’s why.

First off, I like them for the big movers, usually the first or second block of a program (A’s or B’s to some of you). I usually start off by saying, with an 6-8 rep range for example, shoot for 6 reps, if you get to 8 and are feeling really strong still, go for 8. Keep in mind I’m still hoping for a 7-8 out of 10 on the effort scale so that plays a factor into what rep the trainee (client) is targeting.
 
I also find rep ranges good because folks can feel like they’ve made progress on a movement without necessarily adding weight to the bar, because sometimes you’re just not ready for that yet. Example, someone was doing a front squat with 95 lbs for a set of 8 to 10. Maybe the first week they do all their sets for 8 reps. The next week they’re still not overly comfortable with even 105 on the bar, so they stick with 95, BUT they bang out 10 reps for all their sets. I’d still call that progress, even without the bar weight changing 1 ounce.
 
An example that's good, sort of the yang to the yin above, perhaps someone comes in, 6-8 reps are prescribed that phase/week or whatever. They get up to 165 on the bar for their bench press having done that for one of their, we’ll say solid feeling sets, the previous week. Maybe they are not feeling so hot about grinding out that 7th and 8th rep as they’d done so easily the previous week, so they stick with 6 for the day. That is still progress, just not necessarily how we think of it. It gives people a bit of freedom to recognize, 'OK maybe I don’t have it to the same degree today. I’m going to stick with this weight, just back down the reps to that lower end of the rep range.'
 
There you have my fairly short and sweet reasoning for liking and using rep ranges. Have good day fam, thanks for reading and see you next time!

Hi again friends, this piece is going to be a bit niche towards the rugby folk, so I won’t be offended if you close out and pass right by. Those that stick around (not rugby fanatics or fans like me) hopefully I can learn ya a thing or two. As I mentioned, this directed at the rugby universe, if you’re new to following me, welcome and be prepared to hear about this sport, like a silly amount.
 
To the point of today’s posting, why the heck is the rugby universe obsessed with the Bronco drill/test? Those not in the know, a Bronco is a fitness test the rugby universe is in LOOOOVE with, I can't emphasize that point enough. It requires running from the goal line on a rugby pitch, to the 22-meter line and back, the near 10-meter line and back, the far 10-meter line and back, 5 times with no rest (see field graphic below) for time. I am going to upset someone with this and without getting into scientific specifics, because I’ll be honest, I’m still not 100% sure I get the scientific defense. From a logistic sense it doesn’t add up though.

A good time for this test is considered 5-6 minutes or about. In rugby it is very rare that you have a passage of play lasting longer than a minute, so even if the justification was to “over prepare”, 5 minutes is over over doing it. Did I mention there’s usually 15 players on the field so 1 player having to be active (running/working) for that ENTIRE minute or so is also very unlikely.
 
The other generic defense chucked out there is that players need to have long lasting lungs. The games are 80 minutes, split in two 40-minute halves, not sure how 5 minutes equals 40. If you’re saying you need to work on that steady state cardio base, wonderful, we can talk about zone 2 bike sessions and such instead of this.
 
For me, and most of my high schoolers have heard this, the sport is separated into two areas for fitness. Sprinting and being able to repeat sprints over and over, yes with rest and the long steady state I mentioned before. There’s not a ton of in-between shit needed, and I’m not convinced makes sense to try to run flat out for 5 minutes, even with the change of direction. Don’t kid yourself either, you aren’t sprinting for that long, it’s just running.
 
I could justify doing one round of a bronco, maybe two with a bit of rest between, not five though. With that idea, I’d go with a yo-yo or beep test over this still. It’s repeated sprints and the rest does get less and less, but it’s still sprints more than just running. I personally bin all testing at the high school level because there are about 300 other things to focus on and the bronco, the beep or any other test isn’t going to tell me how good of a player our kids are. I’ll let their skill set do the talking and when we get to the daily fitness drills, I’ll be able to tell who can keep up and who has issues.

Last note, why are we SO obsessed with tests in general for sports? There's a league here in the U.S. that puts their future players through a litany of tests before they enter said league and it's still a terrible predictor for success. Spoiler alert, some people are horrible test takers, that's a fact of life. It does not mean they can't do the job asked of them or perform tasks required for their career, some brains are just wired different.

I've gone a bit off topic, but point is, Bronco test probably needs to be put under more scrutiny and no longer be just accepted as king of the fitness tests in rugby. If you can't explain why in simple terms, it's probably not needed. That's all for today friends, thanks very much for reading and have yourself a week.