Applied Sports Science newsletter – March 24, 2016

After suffering a flat tire and finishing a disappointing 38th place in the 2012 Olympic Games in London, Gwen Jorgensen quickly assessed what she needed to do to win Gold in 2016. “After the London Olympics, I researched what the best triathletes in the world were doing, and most were in a daily performance environment training with international athletes,” … Having a coach providing daily feedback, and the new squad environment, has made a big impact on Jorgensen. “Jamie and the Wollongong Wizards are a huge part of my success,” she says. “Jamie is at every session. This allows him to analyze when I am too fatigued and need a break versus when I am tired and need to push through. He is also there to give technical feedback and help me improve as an athlete.” Since her time with Turner, Jorgensen has won the ITU World Championship in 2014 and 2015, and holds the women’s record for career ITU World Triathlon Series (WTS) wins with 15. Jorgensen has won every race she started since May of 2014 for 12 consecutive wins on the WTS circuit and in 2015, Jorgensen became the first triathlete, male or female, to complete an undefeated season.

Last week, there was a great piece on SI.com by Chris Ballard on Steph Curry’s outrageously good shooting. Curry has great mechanics, practices a ton, and readily accepts feedback from skills development guru Bruce Fraser, who has worked with a number of the greatest shooters ever. Curry also seems to understand that as the renowned hockey coach Herb Brooks famously said, “The legs feed the wolf.” In other words, Curry’s shot comes from his legs and his core and from getting his whole body into his shot with rhythm and timing. That’s the key, and it seems to be especially true as he lights it up from way downtown.

Perhaps the most important insight in the piece was Fraser’s comment that it was 75% practice and 25% talent that accounts for Curry’s exceptional performance. These two factors are interdependent, but the take-home message for us all is that most of us can get a lot better at almost anything we do by mastering proper technique and practicing.

Coach Andrea Hudy from the University of Kansas (KU) presents “The KU Way,” a Career Talk about working as a strength coach in the collegiate setting. In this first video of the series, Coach Hudy discusses what it takes to become a successful strength and conditioning coach, including embracing failure, core values, and leadership.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of repeated use of active recovery during a four-day shock microcycle with seven high-intensity interval training (HIT) sessions on markers of fatigue. Methods: Eight elite male junior tennis players (age: 15.1±1.4 years) with an international ranking between 59 and 907 (International Tennis Federation) participated in this study. After each training session, the players completed 15 min of either moderate jogging (active recovery, ACT) or passive recovery (PAS) with a crossover design, which was interrupted by a four-month washout period. Countermovement jump (CMJ) height, serum concentration of creatine kinase (CK), delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and perceived recovery and stress (Short Recovery and Stress Scale) were measured 24 h before and 24 h after the training program. Results: The HIT shock microcycle induced a large decrease in CMJ performance (ACT: Effect Size [ES]=-1.39, p<0.05; PAS: ES=-1.42, p<0.05) and perceived recovery (ACT: ES=-1.79, p<0.05; PAS: ES=-2.39, p0.05; PAS: ES=0.81, p>0.05), DOMS (ACT: ES=2.02, p<0.05; PAS: ES=2.17, p<0.05), and perceived stress (ACT: ES=1.98, p<0.05; PAS: ES=3.06, p<0.05), compared to the values before the intervention. However, no significant recovery intervention × time interactions or meaningful differences in changes were noted in any of the markers between ACT and PAS. Conclusions: Repeated use of individualized ACT, consisting of 15 min of moderate jogging, after finishing each training session during a HIT shock microcycle did not affect exercise-induced fatigue.

PURPOSE: The session RPE (sRPE) has gained popularity as a “user friendly” method for evaluating internal training load. sRPE has historically been obtained 30-min following exercise. This study evaluated the effect of post-exercise measurement time on sRPE following steady-state and interval cycle exercise. METHODS: Well-trained subjects (N=15) (VO2max=51+4 & 36+4 ml.kg-1 (cycle ergometer) for men & women, respectively) completed counterbalanced 30-min steady-state and interval training bouts. The steady-state ride was at 90% of ventilatory threshold (VT). The work-to-rest ratio of the interval rides was 1:1 and the interval segment durations were 1-, 2- & 3-min. The high-intensity component of each interval bout was 75% peak power output (PPO), which was accepted as a surrogate of the respiratory compensation threshold, critical power or maximal lactate steady state. Heart rate (HR), blood lactate [BLa], and Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) were measured. The sRPE (Category Ratio Scale) was measured at 5-, 10-, 15-, 20-, 2-, 30-, 60-min and 24-hr following each ride, using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to prevent bias associated with specific RPE verbal anchors. RESULTS: sRPE, at 30-min post exercise, followed a similar trend: steady state=3.7, 1-min=3.9, 2-min=4.7, 3-min=6.2. No significant differences (p ? 0.05) in sRPE were found based on post-exercise sampling times, from 5-min to 24-hr post-exercise. CONCLUSION: Post-exercise time does not appear to have a significant effect on sRPE after either steady-state or interval exercise. Thus, sRPE appears to be temporally robust and is not necessarily limited to the 30-min post exercise window historically used with this technique, although the presence/absence of a cool-down period after the exercise bout may be of importance

Andrea Hudy and the Kansas Jayhawks basketball program were the first university to utilize Sparta’s proprietary force plate technology. Now in their 4th year with Sparta, here’s a look into how the #1 Ranked Jayhawks use the Movement Signature™ to drive their programming decisions and keep them injury free.

During exercise, there is a progressive reduction in the ability to produce muscle forces. Processes within the nervous system, as well as within the muscles contribute to this fatigue. In addition to impaired function of the motor system, sensations associated with fatigue, and impairment of homeostasis can contribute to impairment of performance during exercise. This review discusses some of the neural changes that accompany exercise and the development of fatigue. The role of brain monoaminergic neurotransmitter systems in whole-body endurance performance is discussed, particularly with regard to exercise in hot environments. Next, fatigue-related alterations in the neuromuscular pathway are discussed in terms of changes in motor unit firing, motoneuron excitability and motor cortical excitability. These changes have mostly been investigated during single-limb isometric contractions. Finally, the small-diameter muscle afferents that increase firing with exercise and fatigue are discussed. These afferents have roles in cardiovascular and respiratory responses to exercise, and in impairment of exercise performance through interaction with the motor pathway, as well as providing sensations of muscle discomfort. Thus, changes at all levels of the nervous system including the brain, spinal cord, motor output, sensory input and autonomic function occur during exercise and fatigue. The mix of influences and the importance of their contribution varies with the type of exercise being performed.

… Why is changing mindsets inside a company so hard? It seems to be an intractable problem, something companies throw money at to no end, but also largely to no avail.

I think it boils down to one thing: we think of the mindsets problem as being one of individuals when really it is one of ecosystem.

We think, as a problem of individuals, the solution exists at the individual level?—?we train individuals, give individuals new languages, bring in a new person, form a new team. But the solution must be an ecosystem solution to be successful, because companies are ecosystems, and ecosystems are resilient?—?they bounce back when you push on them. That can be great for your company, but it can be problematic as well.

MC10’s flexible sensors began in the world of sports, but the company’s aim to solve broad healthcare problems will eventually bring it within FDA’s fold.

… I’d like to start with your concept of “permissionless innovation,” which, as I understand it, is moving innovation from large institutions to the edges—to the streets, kitchens, garages, and dorm rooms. What does it mean to you to live in a world of permissionless innovation, and what are the implications for all of us?

I think the main driver of permissionless innovation is that the cost of innovation is going down—because of the Internet, Moore’s Law, and even the new advances in manufacturing technology, prototyping technology, and life sciences. The reason you usually need permission (other than regulatory issues) is that you need money.

Google, Yahoo, and Facebook all created their products before they raised any money. By the time they came around, all you needed was a PC, open-source free software, and the Internet to launch a company. So, what I mean by permissionless innovation is that those companies didn’t need to ask anybody for permission to launch something.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the rise of wearable fitness technology, and whether its benefits will be able to match its hype. In many respects, I remain a skeptic that technology is really an improvement over learning to monitor your own feelings and sensations.

But, as I wrote in the New York Times over the weekend, I’m starting to think that the true power of wearable fitness tech could be its ubiquity. It may be hard to extract meaning from any one individual’s data—but collectively, the millions of people wearing self-monitoring devices amount to “the largest and most comprehensive observational health trial ever conducted.”

What does this mean? After the article was published, I got an e-mail from Brandon Ballinger, an ex-Google engineer who focuses on “machine learning”—think, for example, speech recognition and spam detection. He has spent a couple of years working with cardiologists at the University of California San Francisco, and recently co-founded Cardiogram, an app that collects and analyzes heart-rate data from the Apple Watch and Android Wear.

… During the previous several months, teams had finally begun to take hockey analytics seriously. Front offices in Toronto, Edmonton and New Jersey all made high profile analytics hires and joined the ranks of the teams that were already quietly crunching numbers.

There was even a fancy (or fancy stats) name: 2014 was the Summer of Analytics.

As noted in the Toronto Star, even some players were buying in. So let’s think about how Soros might view all this …

To begin, hockey is an incredibly complex and dynamic game. As fans who remember the high-scoring Edmonton Oilers of the 1980s and the neutral zone trap of the New Jersey Devils in the 1990s and early 2000s know, requiring players to shift between offense and defense in a matter of seconds makes it far from obvious what the optimal balance is between the two. Commentators can prattle on about “defense wins championships,” but as my colleague IJay Palansky has observed, that claim is basically just made up.

As Andrew Andrews’ college career winds toward its finish, the senior has taken time to thank those who have impacted his career most. From coach Lorenzo Romar and his staff, to his teammates, the point guard has thoughtfully credited those around him.

But, of all the things he has said, of all the people he has thanked, one quote stands out.

“I also have to give a shoutout to Pabail, who has helped expand my mind on the game and life in general, thanks for helping me grow as a man,” Andrews said.

That quote is reflective of the impact Pabail S. Sidhu, the Huskies’ director of basketball strategies, has on the university’s basketball program.

… He became an innovator and celebrity. When he wasn’t writing for FiveThirtyEight or “Grantland,” the former ESPN product, NBA execs were seeking his counsel. He had both vision and the promise of more to come, and that took him to another place altogether this month.

Now Goldsberry works for the Spurs.

Behind closed doors.

The hiring itself seemingly goes against the nature of a franchise that brought America the Gregg Popovich on-court interview. The Spurs have never been particularly media friendly, and Goldsberry is a self-described “media guy.” He has Matt Bonner stories in his clip file.

But give this to R.C. Buford. He doesn’t discriminate. He will go where the information is, no matter the source.

You often hear former pros and managers talk about the importance of “settled lineups,” and it makes sense. If the same guys are playing together, they develop chemistry and an understanding that makes them more effective. They’ll also have a better grasp of whatever tactical system their manager wants to play.

But that’s also something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. A team that is doing well, at least relative to its goals for the season, will tend to not make too many changes under the old maxim “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” As such, I decided to look at the top six teams across Europe’s big five leagues and work out what percentage of league minutes the 11 most-used players spent on the pitch. Now, there are obviously a bunch of factors that account for these numbers, which is why they’re best used in conjunction with other data.