WAG Limiting Skill Repetitions vs. Limiting Workout Hours

[JBS]

This is a conversation that I am splitting off from a different thread as there is so much more to think about than just limiting hours. This is one of the most important things that modern high level coaches need to coach for. This discussion is exactly what the title sounds like...

• Limiting Skill Repetitions vs. Limiting Workout Hours
  • Pros & Cons of each of the above
  • How to do each of the above
  • What counts as each of the above
  • Controlling vs. limiting

The second post in this thread by @CuriousCate is from the other thread. The third and fourth posts are also from the other thread.

The following post was from the following thread...

WAG - Weekly Practice Limits - 16 Hours

My dd is a 10 Yr old finishing up lvl 8 and training for lvl 9 and Hopes. Her gym just posted a notice that no gymnasts will be allowed to train more than 16 hours per week. Is there any research out there supporting a limit like this? I just can’t see how an athlete can acquire the more...

chalkbucket.com

 

[CuriousCate]

A bit off from the original question, but I think regulations should be made based on max # reps allowed for each skill by age of the child. This is the best way to prevent overuse injuries that have long-term sequela. Similar to pitch counts for little league. The hours don't matter as much if the reps are regulated. I do obviously realize that this will never actually happen.

 

[catchingupmom]

That is an interesting perspective CuriousCate! I actually think that would make more sense than capping the total hours in program, since every gym has their own formulas on conditioning, stretching, warm up, drills, etc. I have a HS nephew who nearly pitched out his full pitch count in an entire game on the weekend and you could see the pitch quality go down in the last inning, he'd barely made it he was so exhausted (he's not the type to tell the coach he's done). I've heard of some not so great gyms/coaches out there who are similarly not letting a gymnast move on until they've done X skill five times in a row successfully. With each rep they get fatigued and frustrated and less capable of achieving a satisfactory skill. Food for thought!

 

[Coach Kate]

A bit off from the original question, but I think regulations should be made based on max # reps allowed for each skill by age of the child. This is the best way to prevent overuse injuries that have long-term sequela. Similar to pitch counts for little league. The hours don't matter as much if the reps are regulated. I do obviously realize that this will never actually happen.

My coworker and I were really inspired by watching Chellsie Memmel train during her come back. She did very few skill reps but a lot of conditioning and good basics.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

My coworker and I were really inspired by watching Chellsie Memmel train during her come back. She did very few skill reps but a lot of conditioning and good basics.

IMO the most effective and efficient way to train, in the abstract, is to do it this way. Lots of conditioning, lots of basics, a small number of warm-up/lead-up drills/skills/timers for whatever the skill focus will be, an even smaller number of reps of the actual skills being trained.

.... unfortunately, this also tends to be pretty boring. The new, big, focused skills are generally the most exciting part.

 

[raenndrops]

Limiting workout hours:
Pros: Practices don't have to be as long ... or as many days.
More time outside of gym for school activities, family time, friends, and other activities / down time.
Inefficient gyms would need to become more efficient (less time per gymnast may allow for smaller groups, but more of them, so less time standing around).
There might not be as much gym hopping specifically for more hours.
Cons: It's great in theory ... until gyms decide that opening warm-up, stretching, and conditioning don't
count as part of the workout hours. As long as what a "workout" consists of is strictly defined, it could be great.
Gyms may decide to cut back on the number of gymnasts they will accept on team.
They may steer more gymnasts that would have been on their DP teams to Xcel.

Limiting skill repetitions:
Pros: Less likely to get repetitive use injuries
Less impact on muscle memory if they are doing the skill wrong.
Can get through skills in less time.
Cons: What counts as a rep? Back walkover on beam -- does it count as a rep if done on a floor line?
on a laser beam? on a low beam?
Does it also apply to routines? If they did x number of warm-up passes before starting routines,
do the skills done in those warm-up passes count towards their limit?
Would the limits be age based? or level based? I know that in baseball (at least from when I played in the 80s to when I was last actively involved in the 2010s), the pitch count limit goes up with the level which goes up with age. However, they don't count the warm-up pitches in that count.

 

[Coach Kate]

IMO the most effective and efficient way to train, in the abstract, is to do it this way. Lots of conditioning, lots of basics, a small number of warm-up/lead-up drills/skills/timers for whatever the skill focus will be, an even smaller number of reps of the actual skills being trained.

.... unfortunately, this also tends to be pretty boring. The new, big, focused skills are generally the most exciting part.

Before I got pregnant, I did my own adult gymnastics like this between morning preschool classes and nights with team. I really enjoyed it - I did full bar conditioning and an active stretch every day, with line basics and then I'd just pick a few skills to train depending on what I was in the mood for. It was super exciting to do my front walkover front handspring on beam again and clearhips, giants and fly aways, and I kept my body feeling good by not doing a million a day.

 

[estamey21]

I think there is consensus in this community that "quality is better than quantity." A "quality" curriculum uses evidence-based training techniques to serve the short-term and long-term goals of the athlete.

I think the real challenge lies in how to practically achieve a quality training program. As a coach, these are my assumptions:

• [1] Students (and/or parents) know their long-term career goals
• [2] Students (and/or parents) trust the curriculum and the coaches
• [3] Coaches care about evidence-based training techniques
• [4] Coaches are qualified to teach evidence-based training techniques

These assumptions are often violated, which result in training programs that are short-sighted. I coach lower-level gymnastics, and I personally struggle with [1] and [4] because

• [1] the students I train have a wide range of goals that change frequently
• [4] my gym doesn't have enough resources to train me

Given the social and economic forces that influence the sport of gymnastics, I find it nearly impossible to design a "safe" curriculum. Does anyone else have this experience?

 

[Aussie_coach]

The difficulty is that it’s is so individual. A specific limit on repetitions or even training hours based on a gymnasts age and/or level can never really work for everyone.

Every gymnast is unique. We have gymnasts who can do higher levels on less hours, others who need more, some bodies wont tolerate many reps, other bodies need a lot of reps. Some kids fatigue easily and with too many reps their technique becomes poor, others have a need to do a lot more.

Obviously it would take a great deal of flexibility to implement, but it is doable. We do it to a degree. Gymnasts choose their training hours, there is a minimum number to compete, but it’s not huge they can do more if they want. Skill work is individualised, kids move on when ready not when everyone else is ready.