I generally try to have some research basis for my blog posts. However, often the research just doesn't exist or is not exactly on point. Here is an article that will help you evaluate whether the type of training you are doing is effective or not:
The author of the article states that there are basically 3 functions to training: 1. strength development. 2. conditioning. and 3. skill development. The author is frequently critical of unproven and unstudied types of training. Examples might include general balance or vision drills, some supplements, and the latest gizmo or training apparatus that is touted by some company or personal trainer.
You could be wasting your time or money doing some of these things, rather than doing things that we know work. Actually practicing your sport under race-like conditions is one example of something we know works. Perfecting your technique is something we know that works.
He brings up the point that sometimes, doing something that we think would make sense, such as throwing a weighted ball to improve strength in throwing, actually doesn't work and may harm technique. Something very similar to your sport, but just a little different may require different technique or timing or speed, and training for this very similar activity may actually hurt your technique. It's counter-intuitive, but general strength training is probably better than strength training that tries to mimick paddling, but is actually a little different.
Some of the gizmos or sports paraphernalia that are promoted may be useful for athletes who have been injured and are recovering and trying to regain their strenth or general physical abilities. However, for a healthy athlete who is simply trying to get better at his sport, these activities may not make sense and could be simply a waste of time. The time might be better spent practicing your sport than throwing a medicine ball on top of a swiss ball, for example.
I am all for innovation. And any new technique is not going to have research support for it. The researchers are usually behind the athletes. But I think there is a distinction between fads and innovation. If everyone else is doing it but it is new and doesn't have research supporting it, it's not an innovation, it's a fad. If it has research support behind it, it's not a fad.
There are actually 5 parts to the article and this should help you better evaluate your own training to see if it is the most effective. That's what this blog is about- making your training more effective. Read and enjoy:
Comments