Need to gain mph

LankyLefty,

Of course people should try to do things to improve themselves, even if what they decide to do has some risk to it, but you have to understand your audience! If you were the kind of kid who took his time getting into something, carefully studied it to be sure he fully understood the do’s and don’ts, didn’t overextended himself, and understood that it takes time to modify one’s body without causing other problems, good for you. But the reality is, most “kids” aren’t like that.

When you decided to undertake the program you did, were you under same kind of gun Austin was, where there was a limited amount of time to make an extremely significant gain in performance? Its pretty easy to throw out platitudes and clichés about how to …, but its quite a different thing to put them into practice, especially for someone without the experience to understand the consequences of what he’s doing, and under what may well be significant pressure for him.

There are thousands of kids in Austin’s situation. There are some who will do what you did, but there are also some who would try to take shortcuts, because they don’t understand that its no big deal not to make the HS baseball team as a Fr! People mature at different rates, and the kid who can only throw 63 this year, may well mature and throw 75 next year, given some sound techniques, a solid conditioning programs, proper nutrition, and time to allow them to take effect.

I happen to be the parent of a child who even as a very successful college Fr decided he just had to jump into the strength training with both feet, and it cost him dearly because he didn’t understand what he was doing. If that can happen to a college Fr with 9 years of baseball experience under his belt, don’t you think its only wise to caution a HS Fr in even a more stressful situation to take care in his approach?

I do Kyle but only in a general sense…
It’s easy to whack the big guy for blunders…no doubt I’m sure NPA regrets some stands, takes and positions they’ve taken…it’s what happens when you get big. There is tons of money involved and “results” matter…to the bottom line when you support the level of “names” involved.
Greater good? I’m thinkin the scale falls that way currently, they provide excellent and accessable “train the trainer” training nation wide…should they stop? God I hope not, will they be eventually superceded by more nimble and less encumbered entrepenuers (Sp? :shock: )…heck yes if they don’t learn…welcome to business, right now, to me they offer a reasonable and positive product, on a nation-wide basis in a market area where truely no one else competes. But you betcha they have made mistakes…so did Ray Krok and others who tread new ground…like I said…easy to ding.
I personally respect what you’ve accomplished Kyle and Lanky…you’re family to me…don’t fall in Mills’ trap…present the positive stuff you’ve got, it’s good and it will grow.

[quote=“AccelerateGuy”]

Bottom line: athletes need to do as much training as possible with their feet on the ground. This is the only way to develop strength and power throughout the kinetic chain from foot to shoulder.

Its a myth that free weight training is more dangerous or risky than other types of training. We are in the trenches training athletes everyday. With proper progressions and coaching injuries on the training floor are quite rare.

We do use a fair amount of cables (Keiser pneumatic resistance) for movements such as chops, lifts, and rotational patterns…but again, feet on the floor[/quote]

gotta say, I agree with everything you said in regards to training on your feet and the kinetic chain and all that. You are right.

However, for you to say it is a myth that free weight training is more dangerous than other types of training is a little bit absurd. You sound like you have spent plenty of time in the weight room with athletes, but when you are dealing with athletes who are trying to get that last rep, trying to get that PR 1RM, trying to get BETTER with everything they have, you are going to encounter injuries. Granted that a good many of those injuries could be due to improper precautions ( lack of safety bars or spotter, innapropriate weight selection, etc…) but they are still much less likely to occur with ROM guided machines.

With all that being said, when I work with guys I played with or guys who are playing now, I almost exclusively use free weights. Just making the point that you cant say something that isnt free weights is USELESS, and you cant say its a myth that its more dangerous.

PS, according to a study that was in a Muscle and Fitness issue about a year ago, 75% of injuries in the gym are caused by dropped weights, most of which not even occuring during a set- Be Careful!

[quote=“qcbaseball”]

However, for you to say it is a myth that free weight training is more dangerous than other types of training is a little bit absurd.[/quote]

gcbaseball

Appreciate your thoughts in regards to my post. Respectfully, I still maintain my position. ANY exercise modality can be unsafe if an athlete is not prepared for it. I can only speak from my personal experience- yours may be different.
Here are some points:

  • We do not program any movement for an athlete until their joint mechanics are prepared for it. A full kinematic assessment is performed on every athlete. Altered shoulder mechanics? No benching until we clean that up. Kyphotic posture? No deadlifting with a straight bar until kyphosis is addressed. No sense of hip hinging mechanics? Regressed squatting movements until pattern is ingrained. Sadly, this attention to detail is missing in many facilities… this what really leads to injuries under the bar.

-No max-out half reps/quarter reps, etc. If you cannot dominate the weight the set is over. The difference in safety and recovery from a 95% max effort and a 101% effort is tremendous.

-We do no 1 RM testing before an athlete has trained through at least one training cycle. How can someone do a 1 RM without being fully prepared and educated about how we want a movement performed?
These are a few of the steps we take to ensure safety and it has served us very well.

-“Guided ROM” or FORCED ROM? “One size fits all” selectorized equipment (no…moving the seat up and down doesn’t count) alters joint mechanics of the user beyond their control. Safe? No.

-We have had athletes come to us rehabbing ACL, MCL, and other knee and lower leg injuries. Invariably, we find out their lower body strength training routine consisted of Leg Press/Seated Leg Extension/Prone Leg Curl/Seated Calf Raise. Predictably, the athlete ends up blowing out their knee playing their sport because they lack any real hip strength or stability. Safe? No.

Again, I appreciate any feedback and would be more than happy to discuss further either in this thread or through PM.

[quote=“AccelerateGuy”][quote=“qcbaseball”]

However, for you to say it is a myth that free weight training is more dangerous than other types of training is a little bit absurd.[/quote]

gcbaseball

Appreciate your thoughts in regards to my post. Respectfully, I still maintain my position. ANY exercise modality can be unsafe if an athlete is not prepared for it. I can only speak from my personal experience- yours may be different.
Here are some points:

  • We do not program any movement for an athlete until their joint mechanics are prepared for it. A full kinematic assessment is performed on every athlete. Altered shoulder mechanics? No benching until we clean that up. Kyphotic posture? No deadlifting with a straight bar until kyphosis is addressed. No sense of hip hinging mechanics? Regressed squatting movements until pattern is ingrained. Sadly, this attention to detail is missing in many facilities… this what really leads to injuries under the bar.

-No max-out half reps/quarter reps, etc. If you cannot dominate the weight the set is over. The difference in safety and recovery from a 95% max effort and a 101% effort is tremendous.

-We do no 1 RM testing before an athlete has trained through at least one training cycle. How can someone do a 1 RM without being fully prepared and educated about how we want a movement performed?
These are a few of the steps we take to ensure safety and it has served us very well.

-“Guided ROM” or FORCED ROM? “One size fits all” selectorized equipment (no…moving the seat up and down doesn’t count) alters joint mechanics of the user beyond their control. Safe? No.

-We have had athletes come to us rehabbing ACL, MCL, and other knee and lower leg injuries. Invariably, we find out their lower body strength training routine consisted of Leg Press/Seated Leg Extension/Prone Leg Curl/Seated Calf Raise. Predictably, the athlete ends up blowing out their knee playing their sport because they lack any real hip strength or stability. Safe? No.

Again, I appreciate any feedback and would be more than happy to discuss further either in this thread or through PM.[/quote]

Outstanding post and this is nearly identical to how we train guys too. Lots of youth athletes do box squats to get ready for full ROM back squats because they were taught improperly, or more commonly, lack ankle mobility to get deep enough with a natural lordotic curve.

It’s definitely a reason, otherwise the classes would be a lot more accessible. [/quote]
You seem to keep changing your tune. Your original comment claimed making money was the sole reason the NPA exists. Now you’re saying it’s a reason. Big difference there. My whole rebuttal was based on your original statement.

I don’t have a problem with you or anyone having a problem with the NPA selling a $60 mouthpiece. I know I wouldn’t buy one. But it’s ridiculous to imply that cancels out the years of work and research and the collaborations with experts in other fields and everything else the NPA has done.

No. I don’t have a problem with anything else you said. But clearly your comments indicate you have very little insight into the NPA and your comments were, to me, an uneducated slap in the face. If you have a problem with the $60 mouthpiece, then go ahead and say so. But to extrapolate that into “the NPA exists to make money” is just wrong.

“The NPA exists to make money” is not the same as “The NPA solely exists to make money.”

They exist to make money. It is not the sole reason. It may not even be the primary reason. There is nothing wrong with this.

Additionally, this makes up not even 1% of my argument, as I have said multiple times that I have NO PROBLEM with this. My problems are the arguments I put forth that you have no rebuttal for.