(This is the report I submitted to the Foundry, in Cleveland, Ohio, where I assisted the high school interscholastic sailing program in developing a 10 week winter strength training program.)
This is to report that the Foundry Sailing Program’s Winter Strength Training session has been a big success, according to the objectives we set and presented to interested families on December 7, 2018. Our chief aim was to develop STRENGTH, which we were careful to define in objective, measurable terms. We employed a specific, proven TRAINING approach, and the results over 10 weeks proved rewarding for everyone involved.
Strength is defined as ‘the ability to produce force against external resistance.’ These are the words of author and coach Mark Rippetoe, who points out that this is ‘the most fundamental adaptation necessary for increased performance’ in any context. Becoming ‘faster, tougher, more powerful, more agile, more coordinated, more balanced, and more injury proof,’ enhances every aspect of work, play, and life.
For young people, the benefits of strength training include:
• Enhancing overall muscular strength and local muscular endurance
• Strengthening muscles, ligaments, tendons
• Improving bone mineral density, body composition, aerobic fitness, blood lipids, motor performance skills (e.g., jumping and sprinting)
Weight and strength training has been shown to be much safer than running, jumping, or participating in most sports.
Strength is obtained by means of training, a process of systematic, incremental, constant increases in load. Training plays upon an athlete’s aptitude for the process of Stress, Recovery, and Adaptation, though the loads involved and the time allotted for recovery and adaptation must fall within their general capacities. Successful training results in measurable improvement - in the case of strength training, an ability to lift heavier weights than before.
This definition is far more specific than that of exercise, which can refer to all manner of hard work or intense physical exertion, in or out of an athletic context. Becoming hot, sweaty, sore, or tired day after day does not necessarily create a cumulative training effect. Switching exercises or working too hard does not fit the template of incremental increases in a work load, from which an athlete can recover in time for the next workout.
The lifts chosen for our program were the back squat, press, bench press, and deadlift, all done with barbells. Not only are these analogous to basic human movement, the demands they place upon balance, control, and coordination make them the most effective strength exercises in existence. The reason is neuromuscular specificity, the principle stating that since the nervous system controls the muscles, ‘the general pattern of strength acquisition must be the same as that in which the strength will be used.’
These lifts also ‘allow for the greatest amount of weight to be lifted by the greatest amount of muscle mass over the greatest distance possible.’
For the above reasons, weight machines are particularly disqualified as effective means of strength training.
The schedule consisted of two different ‘days’ of training:
‘A’ days
squats (3 sets of 5 reps)
press (3x5)
deadlift (3x5)
horizontal (hanging) rows (3x6-8)
hollow rockers (3x10)
‘B’ days
squats (3x5)
bench press (3x5)
deadlift (3x5)
pull ups or pull-downs (3x6-8)
sit ups (3x10)
The Monday-Wednesday-Friday schedule alternated A-B-A, B-A-B, week to week.
The rows and pull ups were to develop pulling strength; hollow rockers and sit ups are abdominal exercises.
The four main exercises were the real focus of our 10-week Novice Linear Progression. This approach is based on the fact that untrained people can improve strength very quickly at first. This effect tapers off over time; more advanced trainees must manipulate the training variables differently.
However, novices can and should increase their weights every workout until this is no longer possible. For example, the oldest boys increased their squat and deadlift weights by 5 pounds every session. This slowed to 2.5 pound increases after a while, which was the standard they used on their upper body lifts.
The girls generally stuck to 2.5 pound increases - and did not advance every time.
This was permissible, I assured people on Day One. Truth be told, an athlete has to provide for this kind of program, in terms of rest and especially taking in enough protein. I explained that if someone reached a weight and could not manage sets of 5, they could stay there and ‘creep’ the reps upward over a few workouts. Continuous improvement remained the goal.
I would be harping on safety and good technique everyday, I said, but I wasn’t going to ride them on the weight increases. It’s not my brand of coaching. They could advance as they saw fit.
The GIRLS increased (all in terms of sets of 5 reps)
-30-35 pounds in the press, moving from an empty or lightly loaded aluminum(?) 15-pound small Olympic styled bar to 50-55 on a full sized bar
-Their bench was about the same, moving from 15 to 55. I think I saw the occasional stab at 65.
-50 pounds in the squat, progressing from an empty Olympic bar to 25 pound plates on each side
-70 pounds in the deadlift, progressing from 65 pounds to 135. One girl increased by 90 pounds; another with a CrossFit background increased 70 pounds also, but from 115 to 185 for her sets.
The BOYS (also in terms of sets of 5) also made significant increases, though they are separated by tiers of age and size.
The top boys increased their
-press by 40-50 pounds, moving from an empty bar at 45 to 95 and 100
-bench press by 50 as well; two or three went from 85 to 135
-the squat and deadlift really are what set the top boys apart, with squats increasing by 100 or 120 pounds, from 95 to 215
and deadlifts moving from 135 to 235 and 245.
The second tier of boys were mostly juniors, typically tall and light 150 or 160 pounders.
-some of them did increase their presses or benches 40 or 50 pounds, moving from 65 to 105 or 115
-their squats increased by 80, from 95 to 175
-the deadlifts went up 90 or so as well; increasing from 115 to 205
The third tier of boys were freshmen and sophomores, complete beginners who in many cases had to develop consistency in their movements. One poor kid was given to collapsing like a rag doll, especially during squats; he had to start with box squats and practice for a few weeks with very light bars holding his backbone in one piece. One freshman, who’s presently all legs and a very short torso, had to learn to get his trunk down in position as he squatted or deadlifted.
-They progressed 30 - 40 pounds on the upper body lifts, though a bit down the scale, moving from 25 to 55 in the press and 25 to 65 in the bench. One wiry freshman moved from 25 to 85.
-The squat increases here were more modest as well, 50 pounds, ranging from an empty bar to 95.
-The deadlifts fared better slightly, increasing by 80 pounds
Two great exceptions to this third tier has been a pair of sophomores, including that soft bodied beginner who collapsed in every movement. His squats went from essentially zero weight, or a 15 pound aluminum bar, to 95. This was the singlemost remarkable transformation of the session.
His buddy, tall and slender, but quiet and determined, went from an empty bar to 135.
Their deadlifts have climbed from 95 to 205.
A third exception was that wiry 120 pound freshman. Not only did he boost his bench by 60 pounds, he pulled 225 for a double, which was at least a 130 pound increase in the weight he was deadlifting.
We had zero injuries.
I thought it was important above to include the starting and ending weights to show that these kids were indeed non-lifters. About half of the group of 30 lifted last year, but not a single one of them touched a weight since we ended the winter session a year ago. Those kids, simply by having grown, started with weights that were probably 30 pounds ahead of where they started last year.
The brand new kids didn’t even know how to hold the bar, let alone do a lift. I had to start with a lot of position drills, like that praying-hands, elbows-inside-the-knees bottom of the squat, a ’Superman’ to flex the lumbar arch properly, and a lot of ‘bowing up,’ which was sticking our chests out, to be sure our thoracic vertebrae were stacked properly.
Of my 30, 20 were boys, 10 girls. Five kids vanished pretty quickly; I’d see 25 from time to time, but really I had a fairly steady group of about 20, five girls and 15 boys - though a few Fridays before holiday or big skiing weekends were pretty sparsely attended.
One top boy, whose deadlifts started with 135 10 weeks ago, pulled 335, with more in the tank. This would support author Mark Rippetoe’s claim that a dedicated, older high schooler can reach 405 in six months’ time. AN ASIDE: This is true. The Novice Linear Progression in the hands of a motivated teenage boy willing to take in all the necessary protein and not miss a session is absolutely ferocious. There are many stories of kids who once could not make the football team spending a year in the gym and then returning to tryouts to hurl their former tormentors all over the field.
Girls have their own version of this story, many of them becoming powerful swimmers and track athletes by knocking off some of the the endurance work for strength.
Some of the Foundry boys saw their progress stall at about the Seven or Eight week mark. I reminded them of what I told them about whey, a more calorically and cost efficient way than conventional food to get additional protein. Of the half dozen or so who needed it, I think two followed through, and their progress resumed.
The gains made by the girls, who were juniors and seniors, and the freshmen and sophomore boys were largely the same. This might suggest a certain hormonal equivalency between these groups.
One last finding deserves comment: these strength gains are much the same as those from 2018. In 2018, however, we included a 10 or 20 minute aerobic training phase in every session.
(Workouts in 2108 came after the classroom ‘chalk talk.’ Kids were willing to get sweaty and head directly home. That would not have worked this year, when lifting came before classroom time.)
The simple explanation for the similar results is that the kids involved were such strength novices and our 10-week window was so short that disrupting the ‘novice effect’ was unlikely.
It should be known that in strength training, generally speaking, aerobic training can interfere with strength gains. This probably refers to athletes going for long runs on the days in which they should be recovering from lifting, and not the limited, same day phases we scheduled in 2018.
When strength is the primary goal, coaches should be very wary of aerobic work, particularly in the Novice Linear Progression. There is a way to phase it in for Intermediates.
On a personal note, my time volunteering at the Foundry, in the gym and on the water, has been very rewarding. Barbell training is near and dear to my heart. It was instrumental in my growing up, and I suspect it’s been a confidence builder for more kids than we might realize.
I’m very thankful to CM - - , who had started a conditioning program but was generous enough to let me take over upon my arrival in January 2018.
To the extent that this was my enterprise, he and MD - - were an enormous help - but really, the three of us ran a smooth operation.
Finally, the kids have been awesome to work with. They are unfailingly polite, eager, good natured, and willing to follow directions. We are lucky to have such clientele. I look forward to a fun Spring on the water.