Individualizing Your Hockey Training Program At Any Level
More and more coaches are looking to get to the next level by individualizing their training programs, but this can become a daunting task to find the correct pieces to the puzzle for a full team (and potentially multiple). As technology like force plates, 1080 quantum, GymAware, etc. become more mainstream, coaches can have a lot of information at their disposal to break out into many different programs. But what if you are a coach that doesn't have access to high level technology in your setting? And, what if you are the only coach and don't have the ability to coach ~30 different programs at once?
Finding the Athlete's Base Hockey Training Program
In the hierarchy I follow when breaking athletes out in “buckets,” the first questions I ask is “is the athlete heavy enough to play optimally at their position?” To answer this question, I have taken the work of Josh Heenan's minimum ideal bodyweight from the 90MPH Formula and used it in the sport of hockey. Take the athlete's height, in inches, and multiply it by 2.5. If the athlete's body weight is above that number, they move on to the next step of the hierarchy. If they are below that weight, they are put on a hypertrophy focused training program.
If the athlete has optimal body weight, the next question I ask is “can they produce enough force to play optimally at their position?” Strength testing will come in to play to answer this question.
There are many different strategies to find true 1 repetition max or estimated 1 repetition max that I won't go over here, but find the one that works best for your population and setting. Making sure you have one upper body and one lower body assessment is key. We would all hope that our athletes train them both equally, but unfortunately some young American players can have too much of an emphasis on upper body strength development, while some European players can have the opposite. While this is not always true, it is a general observation that many coaches in the trenches would agree on. For my setting and population, we use bench press and trap bar deadlift as our upper and lower body strength assessments, but any lifts can be used as long as the movement is standardized in range of motion and technique. The strength standards I use are 1.4x body weight for bench press and 2.2x body weight for trap bar deadlift. If the athlete can reach both of those numbers on their 1 repetition max (whether true 1RM or estimated), then they move to the next step of the hierarchy. If they can't hit those numbers, they are put on a strength focused training program.
The last question I ask myself when finding an athlete's base program is “how do they produce that force?” The simplest way to answer this question is to find the athlete's eccentric utilization ratio by testing both counter movement jump and non-counter movement jump. Read this article for more info on counter movement and non counter movement jumps.
The equation for EUR is (1-(NCMJ/CMJ)) x 100. Multiplying by 100 makes the ratio a percentage so the values are easier to understand. If the ratio is <7.5%, this means that the athlete does not produce power utilizing the stretch shortening cycle as well as they do from a static position, so these athletes would be put on a speed focused training program. If the ratio is >12.5%, then the athlete is put on a strength focused training program because they utilize the stretch shortening cycle efficiently, but lack the concentric force producing capabilities from a static position. If the ratio is between 7.5% and 12.5%, the athlete is put on a balanced training program of even strength work and speed work.
Now there are four base programs your athletes could be bucketed in – hypertrophy, strength, balanced, speed. Occasionally, there are outliers from this hierarchy that require you to use the art of coaching vs. science. This could be due to a specific player's role within the team, or a playing style that the coach implements.
For example, many goalies won't meet the minimum optimal body weight from above, but very rarely will a goalie or goalie coach say that the athlete needs to gain mass. Regardless of numbers, goalies tend to be put on a strength focused training program for a few reasons. The first is that these athletes tend to be very tall, skinny, and extremely hyper mobile, creating laxity across multiple joints. Having some extra strength surrounding those joints could potentially protect against some soft tissue injuries. Also, the position is extremely speed based, which may be enough of a stimulus in the “speed” category. I'm a firm believer in giving athletes an opposite stimulus off-ice vs. on-ice so I know all buckets are filled.
Another example of an outlier may be with a player that is >220lb (which there are many more of than you would think). If these athletes are so heavy and strong on the ice that they never lose a battle in the corners or in front of the net, but don't hit the strength standards in the weight room, it should have you asking yourself if they really need more strength.
Also, as these athletes get heavier, these strength standards can become really astronomical to hit for someone who isn't a strength sport athlete (220lb athlete would have to bench 310lb and trap bar 485lb to reach the standards above). Lastly, the biggest criticism for these larger athletes from their sport coaches is that they are too big and slow, so a focus on strength is likely not going to reflect well on what the coach is seeing on-ice. Because of all of these factors, my heaviest athletes tend to be put on a speed focused training program.
Movement Capabilities For a Hockey Training Program
The last step of this process is to take the base programs from each athlete and see if there's any movement restrictions that they currently have that need to be addressed, and if those restrictions will prevent them from doing anything in the program. For example, if an athlete has a shoulder flexion restriction but have chin ups programmed, I will replace chin ups with a cable high row so there is still a vertical pulling pattern, but it can be done in more of a diagonal motion at the athlete's capacity. I currently measure ankle dorsiflexion, hip internal and external rotation, thoracic rotation, shoulder internal and external rotation, and shoulder flexion. Being able to see how different joints move all the way up the chain allows “fillers” to be programmed if an athlete has a serious restriction that needs to be cleared up. Rather than standing around during a rest period, this is the perfect time to work on a deficiency while allowing the CNS, heart rate, and breathing to recover.
Every team member and player are looking for that extra 1% improvement, and cookie cutter programs are leaving something to be desired. These steps allow athletes to know they are getting something that is dedicated for them, as well as allowing me, the lone coach, to not be overwhelmed with too much craziness of individualization.
About Tim
Tim Lebbossiere is entering his third year as the Strength and Conditioning Coach for the Providence Bruins, the AHL affiliate of the Boston Bruins. He holds certifications from FRC, RPR, FMS, and Precision Nutrition. He also has a Master's Degree in Human Performance from Lindenwood University, as well as a Bachelor's Degree in Applied Exercise Science from Springfield College.
You can follow Tim on Instagram (@timlebbossiere) and Twitter (@timlebbossiere).
Have a Specific Question For Tim?
Join our community and get in touch with him directly.
