Individualization made easy
This month’s topic on HMMRMedia is the individualization of training. The one size fits all model is a thing of the past; both scientific research and hard won experience have shown the need to individualize training. But many coaches still struggle to figure out how to start with individualization.
Easy solutions for complex problems
If we are honest, we have to admit that most people already do personalize training for their athletes, they just might not be aware that they do. Perhaps this is because of a perception that such personalization has to be complex, when, in reality, it doesn’t. Additionally, it’s tempting to think that everything needs to personalized, when, again, in reality doing so would lead to an overly complex training plan.
So, how can you personalize the training process without making it all too complicated to follow? The easiest way is to realize that, actually, the demands of the event largely dictate the training that the athlete needs to do. If you coach a group of sprinters, they’re all going to have to have training sessions where they focus on block starts, acceleration, maximum velocity, and speed endurance. In the gym, they’re going to have some form of heavy lifting, some form of power development work, and some injury prevention exercises. The key to optimal personalization is to make small adjustments to these aspects, so that some athletes prioritize a certain area, whilst others set their priorities on a different area.
An example from sprinting
A simple example of this comes from my days as a sprinter when I was coached by Malcolm Arnold. At that time, Malcolm’s 400 meter training group had about six different athletes in it, all with their own unique backgrounds and nuances. Some of these athletes were more speed orientated 400 meter runners (typically with strong 200 meter personal bests), whilst others were more endurance orientated (often with a background in 800 meter running).
When required, Malcolm could separate these athletes into sessions that would suit them, so that, on the cardiovascular endurance development day of the week, those with the 800 meter background would have a session of perhaps a 30 minute aerobic run, whilst those from the speed background would have a session of 1 minute on, 3 minutes off, as their way on enhancing their cardiovascular fitness. This separation was important, as the speed orientated 400 meter runners really didn’t enjoy the longer runs, and perceived that they got very little benefit from it. By changing the session to suit their requirements, Malcolm increased their buy-in, and also matched the training session to that which experience told him they would respond best to.
Training with buckets
What Malcolm did was put athletes into buckets based on their background. Using buckets is a simple way to start individualizing training. You can do this based on your knowledge and experience of what the athlete requires (which is determined by event and sport characteristics, training history, along with testing and performance data), and what they have previously responded well to. So, in a group of 10 sprinters, you might have 3 athletes who are historically poor starters, and seven who tend to start well, but have trouble finishing the race. In this case, when planning the training cycle for the sprinters, the majority of sessions would be the same, but with a bias towards more start work for the three athletes who require it, and slightly more speed endurance work for the remaining seven.
Similarly, in the gym, experience might tell you that four of your athletes seem to respond favorably to heavy load, but limited volume, whilst the other six tolerate volume more favorably; this would obviously impact the sets and reps you program, whilst still remaining within the framework of what is required to develop sprinters. I was part of a study that personalized resistance training by placing athletes into two “buckets” based on their results in a combination of 15 different genes, and we found that using such a method — genetically matched training — was more effective that the opposite (mis-matched) training type.
This doesn’t always have to be meticulously planned either; in fact, it might be better to remain agile. In this case, you have a weekly plan set up, but modify it day to day based on the athlete; are they more tired than usual, or do they have a big life event coming up (such as important exams)? Within-training monitoring of performance can also inform you as to how the athlete is adapting; are they improving quicker than expected (in which case you might need to change to stimulus so they don’t get stale), or are they responding slower than normal (in which case you might extent that particular training phase, or look at the various lifestyle factors that may be hindering adaptations). Similarly, the athletes injury history will likely drive the injury prevention exercises you program. Again, this can be done by “bucketing” athletes; perhaps you develop a hamstring circuit, a “core” circuit, a shoulder circuit, and a calf circuit, and then program these with differing weightings within your gym sessions.
A flow chart for individualization
In summing up, personalized training doesn’t have to be overly complex, and, in fact, it shouldn’t be. It’s likely that you already have some element of personalization present within your training plans; the next step is to further enhance this. This can occur on two levels; chronic, which refers to the long(er) term plan, and acute, which refers to the day to day adjustments that may need to be made. I’ve put together a flow chat below which acts as a simple overview of how you might personalize the training process; here, the key is taking the athlete from where they are right now, to where they need to get to, through developing a training plan that is set up to match their own unique needs as much as possible.
Originally published at www.hmmrmedia.com.
