Optimales Training Weineck Pdf 17

Download ->>> https://fancli.com/2t2UJu

There have been only a limited number of studies available on the physical requirements in dance teachers (DT), who are responsible for the training of recreational and/or professional dancers and/or dance students. First results provide indications that a consideration of physical work load (teaching load) of this occupational group is necessary.

Most dance units do not represent a load in the sense of a endurance training unit. An increase in aerobic fitness and possible positive effects in the context of injury prevention is not to be expected. In J/MD, the use of RPEs for the rough estimation of cardiovascular stress is conceivable. The assessment of cardiovascular load in dance lessons requires further investigations for more precise assessments.

Two heart rate monitors (receivers) and a transmitter belt (S625X from Polar) were used to record the heart rate during one to two dance units. The transmitter-receiver system was set to register the heart rates at 5-s intervals and store them in the receivers. Afterwards the values were read out via the Polar software (Polar ProTrainer 5 version 5.41.002) and the raw values were exported for further data processing. The system was activated immediately prior to each training unit and deactivated at the end.

Dahlström (1997) [3] found greater increases in cardiovascular stress from warm-up phase T1 to main phase T2 during a lesson than the present study was able to show. One reason could be the different populations of pupils. Teaching experienced adults may allow a more intensive training with fewer breaks in group organization and a consequent drop in heart rate than is the case with beginners and children. This at least is what the heart rate curves of Dahlström (1997) [3] suggest in comparison to this study.

As to the J/MD, the use of RPE would be conceivable in order to provide a rough estimate of cardiovascular load, especially since the effort involved in collecting data is extremely low. Furthermore, our study suggests the strong assumption that teaching in the dance classes does not usually provide an adequate stimulus in the sense of basic endurance training to increase aerobic capacity.

As high-performance practitioners, it is our responsibility to think logically about the programming and implementation of training as it relates to the actual daily environment of our athletes. In many cases, those athletes are adjusting to an academic load and ever-evolving range of social stresses (from friends, family, and life), as well as a multitude of lifestyle factors that can and should be guided along with training prescription (i.e., nutrition, sleep, mindfulness, and behavior).

Eventually, some organization must come through the chaos, as the practitioner thinks critically about the adaptive process of the athlete(s) and the training effect pursued by the coach and athlete. With planning comes purpose and clarity for both parties (coach and athlete), and it enables them to focus more attention on other tangible concerns throughout training, sport, and life. The lifting (or weight room) piece is understood, and there is a shared road map for what to do and in which direction to go.

In sports like track & field and rowing, there is not much variety to the competitive event (or, for that matter, the training for that event). Athletes perform the same technical, structured movement with fluidity and rhythm, and the more efficient these repetitive actions are over and over, the better the athlete will be. There is a massive aerobic component and ability to endure with these events, as it is the average velocity across the race that determines the winner.

Whether you understand the law of averages or the law of large numbers, we know that with a greater maximum comes a greater average. This means that improving strength and power output in these athletes will ultimately improve their average velocity and, in turn, their performance. With this goal in mind, the picture and purpose become clearer on how to plan and program training in the weight room for athletes in a cyclic sport.

These stimuli occur at, through, and of the muscle. But when training for longer periods than an 8- to 12-week research study, there needs to be balance and variety across time, as training all qualities simultaneously or frequently can lead to overtraining and maladaptation because of mixed or inconsistent signaling.

As always, it is not about what you do, but how you do it that makes it effective. This process starts with a shared goal of strength development, within the minds of both the coaches and athletes involved. The majority of the work outside of the weight room is meant to develop capacity and energy system function, as well as the mental fortitude to endure paces and volumes that create adaptations within the cardiorespiratory system. Unlike the acyclic team sports that involve numerous qualities, skills, abilities, and reactionary components, these cyclic sports have a narrower focus when it comes to the nuts and bolts of development. As long as coaches place strength training correctly and plan the volumes and intensities of endurance work appropriately, strength development can concurrently occur with the development of aerobic capabilities.

As we shift into a Neuromuscular Phase of training, our goal of strength development remains, but our means and methods shift to encouraging greater loads on the bar. We shift into a 3-6 rep range initially, promoting RPEs of 8-9 with the goal of mechanical tension. We can play with variations and prescriptions of tempo to help drive this, as well as controlling/encouraging greater loads. But this is where we become technicians, focusing on the movement itself, and the athletes begin to develop a routine as we address the bar physically and mentally (applying the same appreciation for a few repetitions as we do for the skill of repetitive actions in running and rowing). The same mindful and technical approach is taken to lifting heavy loads, as this allows for the most beneficial result.

Again, 2-3 weeks allows for productivity and progress, but limits overreaching. Some athletes enjoy this type of training and it allows them to embrace this side of their strength development, while those who despise higher reps per set know it is a necessary stimulus for their event.

Training is difficult to generalize, as there is so much context to the environment and individual to appreciate. But the practitioner must embrace the gray areas, expose the athlete to variety, and manage the swinging pendulum of load and recovery to promote adaption. This is not new, but through the marriage of science and traditional practices, training systems have grown more concrete.

Cody Roberts is currently a strength and conditioning coach and adjunct lecturer at the University of Iowa, working with Olympic Sports and within the Health and Human Physiology department. His opportunities and experiences as a collegiate student-athlete, administrator, coach, and teacher in the ever-growing and changing environment of collegiate athletics have shaped his holistic approach to the training and education processes of the student-athletes and staff he works alongside. Cody has experience with a broad spectrum of sports, with time spent at numerous universities (University of Kansas, Illinois State, Bradley University, Iowa). He has been coached by, and has coached alongside, some of the best and brightest in the industry. He currently lives in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, with his wife Jessica. 2b1af7f3a8