Velocity Based Training

Velocity  Based  Training-­?  How  We  Utilize  the  Technology  with  Limited  Resources  in   the  Team  Setting     Velocity  Based  Training,  or  VBT  is  not  new.  Tendo  units  have  been  commercially   available  for  15+  years.  Other  systems  of  measuring  bar  speed  have  been  in   existence  even  longer.  Video  based  systems,  tools  using  accelerometers,  and  new   versions  of  linear  position  transducer's  have  all  added  to  the  body  of  technology,   which  allows  accurate  and  timely  measurement  of  velocity  in  weight  lifting.  The  idea   of  measuring,  quantifying,  and  utilizing  speed  of  movement  instead  of  simply  the   load  associated  with  an  exercise  is  merely  emphasizing  the  other  side  of  the   Force=Mass  x  Acceleration  formula.  However,  as  is  always  a  constraint  of  the  team   setting,  equipment  needs  are  mandated  by  the  ability  to  have  many  athletes   seamlessly  be  able  to  train  without  undue  restrictions  on  time.  Because  of  this,  I  am   of  the  belief  that  any  single-­?use  piece  of  equipment  will  be  of  little  practical  use  in   the  team  setting.  Unfortunately,  VBT  tools,  while  decreasing  in  cost  over  the  last  few   years,  are  still  pretty  pricey.  Because  of  this,  we  have  only  one  VBT  system  in  our   Hockey  Performance  Center  at  UMass  Lowell.  To  get  around  the  issues  of  not  having   enough  access  to  easily  use  this  tool  in  the  team  setting,  I  have  done  a  few  things   that  have  allowed  us  to  still  get  good  use  of  the  one  piece  of  velocity  technology  we   do  have.      

The  first  thing  that  I  have  done  with  the  tool  to  allow  us  to  get  actionable  data  from   it  is  to  utilize  it  for  testing/assessment.  Quite  simply,  the  majority  of  our  players   don't  regularly  use  VBT,  but  will  utilize  it  periodically  during  testing,  or  “assessment   periods”  as  I  like  to  call  them.  This  is  a  scenario,  such  as  just  prior  to  the  players   going  home  for  winter  break,  where  we  re-­?assess  where  they  are  from  a  training   perspective.  I  don't  call  it  or  consider  it  “testing”,  as  we  aren't  necessarily  trying  to   establish  new  1RM's.  We  are  simply  performing  an  exercise,  such  as  the  hang  clean   or  Rear  Foot  Elevated  Split  Squat  at  a  load,  which  they  have  previously  used   (generally  80%  of  their  previous  1RM)  to  get  an  idea  of  their  progress.  In  this  case,   we  have  the  players  perform  5  Hang  Cleans  and  we  record  their  Peak  Velocity  from   the  set.  This  number  allows  us  to  check  back  in  from  time  to  time  and  compare  past   speeds  vs.  current  speeds  to  make  sure  that  our  program  is  improving  the  qualities   we  are  trying  to  develop,  in  this  case,  speed-­?strength.  If  we  are  using  RFE's  in  this   manner,  we  will  record  AVG  Velocity,  but  the  protocol  would  be  very  similar.      

The  second  way  that  we  have  been  able  to  make  the  best  of  the  reality  of  only  having   one  VBT  tool  is  to  “bucket”  players  into  different  groups  based  on  their  physiological   development,  and  utilize  the  tool  with  a  small  subset  of  the  team  who  is  “strong   enough”  and  would  be  better  suited  to  focus  on  another  quality  instead  of  maximum   strength.  Within  our  team,  we  currently  have  3  buckets,  or  groups.  All  the  groups   train  together,  however  there  will  be  small  differences  in  volume/intensity  or  even   exercise  selection  based  on  what  the  right  tool  for  the  job  is  for  each  group.  For   example,  the  “Speed  Group”  uses  RFE's  along  with  the  VBT  tool  to  train  within   certain  speed  zones,  whereas  the  “Max  Strength  Group”  also  uses  RFE's  as  their   primary  lower  body  pushing  exercise,  however  they  are  more  traditionally  focused  on  load/intensity  rather  than  speed.  The  third  group,  which  we  call  the   “Hypertrophy  Group”  (but  really  is  just  the  general  training/freshmen  group)  also   performs  RFE's,  although  at  slightly  lower  total  intensities  and  slightly  higher   volumes,  as  well  as  using  a  combination  of  vests  and  dumbbells  to  load  the   movement  versus  the  use  of  a  Safety  Squat  bar,  which  the  other  two  groups  use.       By  designating  VBT  to  a  small  group  who  has  the  potential  to  gain  the  most  from  the   technology,  we  are  able  to  utilize  the  tool  in  the  team  setting.  This  work-­?around  also   serves  as  some  level  of  motivation,  as  only  the  strongest,  and  typically  the  hardest   workers  make  their  way  into  this  group  and  get  to  use  this  piece  of  equipment.  They   get  the  benefit  of  training  with  a  tool  that  might  help  them  get  a  few  more   percentage  points  of  development  out  of  them  at  the  tail  end  of  their  college  careers,   and  the  other  athletes  have  some  motivation  to  keep  working  hard,  day  after  day.      

From  a  practical  perspective,  the  way  we  use  our  VBT  tool  with  this  advanced  group   is  to  provide  a  starting  weight  for  an  exercise  (again,  mostly  Cleans/Snatches  and   RFE's),  and  then  a  “speed  zone”  that  will  serve  to  direct  how  they  load  subsequent   sets.  For  example,  by  programming  75%  of  1RM  for  the  clean,  and  then  setting  the   speed  zones  from  1.7m/s  to  1.9m/s,  we  are  saying  to  the  athlete  that  if  they  can   move  the  bar  faster  than  1.9m/s,  they  need  to  add  5-­?10lbs  on  the  next  set.   Conversely,  if  they  cannot  move  the  bar  faster  than  1.7m/s,  then  they  should   decrease  the  load  slightly  on  the  following  sets.  This  ensures  that  they  are  using  the   right  weight  for  the  quality  we  are  trying  to  develop,  and  also  “autoregulates”  their   program  based  on  their  fatigue  levels.  A  good  example  of  this  within  the  group  are   two  players,  one  who  is  a  top  6  forward,  and  another  who  is  a  role  player  and  is  in   and  out  of  the  lineup.  The  high  minute  player  will  probably  accumulate  more  fatigue   throughout  the  season,  and  therefore  may  not  be  able  to  move  75%  at  the  same   speed  as  the  other  player  who  won't  be  as  tired.  By  using  VBT,  both  players  end  up   using  the  proper  load  for  the  state  of  their  own  nervous  system,  instead  of  a  rather   arbitrary  load  based  on  a  1RM  test  from  several  months  ago.      

Like  any  piece  of  technology  in  training,  VBT  is  simply  another  tool  in  the  toolbox.   Can  we  get  by  without  it?  Certainly…and  most  of  our  athletes  do.  However,  a  small   group  of  players  may  benefit  from  a  tool,  which  allows  for  slightly  more  detailed   progression  and  it  also  acts  as  an  assessment  tool  to  provide  longer-­?term  feedback   for  both  the  players  and  the  coach.  The  limitations  of  not  having  access  to  multiple   units  is  somewhat  offset  by  being  creative  about  who  gets  access  to  the  technology