Comment by Nick Tatalias on hip flexor strength

A comment by Nick Tatalias on my "Hip Flexor" post contains such significant observations and extensions to my arguments that I felt it deserved highlighting. It is by no means the first time that Nick has materially expanded on one of my posts. Here is an excerpt from the comment:

... hip flexor strength is essential to athletic function simply because the body will begin to retard the agonist action early if the antagonist is weak. This reaction of the body prevents injury by preventing over extension. Strong antagonists allow the agonist to fire for much longer before the antagonist must fire to prevent joint over extension. The early retardation will slow the movement restrict range of motion and will cause slower runners. If the Weyland study is correct in its assertion that overall speed is dependant on ground forces generated and range of motion (as these two functions increase stride length) and not leg speed then by deduction if cycle times remain constant but stride length increase then speed must increase ...

Read more...

"All backs ... over 105kg" - is this the future of rugby?

In a comment on the post titled, "Rugby - the most strength-oriented code of football," Nick Tatalias writes:

all backs should weigh in over 105Kg and loose forwards 115kg and tight forwards at least 125 plus ... always capable of great speed of course.

Now there's a brave call, and one that should spark some controversy. Personally, I'm in broad agreement with him, as I indicate in my reply to Nick's comment. What do others think?
rugby
Read more...

Nick Tatalias on explosive strength training for rugby

[Summary: Nick Tatalias suggests that forwards who are exhausted after scrums and mauls may need greater strength and better anaerobic rather than aerobic conditioning. He argues that changes to the Laws of Rugby have increased the proportion of explosive actions in a game and consequently the need for explosive strength training.]

I have just come across a very interesting post by Nick Tatalias in the IRB Forums from March last year. This was a contribution to a long thread addressing the issue of why South African teams had been so unsuccessful in Super 12 competitions.

Nick Tatalias suggested that when conditioning coaches observe some of their forwards standing with hands on knees trying to catch their breath, they conclude that the players need more aerobic type conditioning; but he maintains that this "further exacerbates the problem. When in truth the issue is that greater levels of strength are needed, better anaerobic conditioning and lastly sprint endurance."

Tatalias's view is that the players are tired because they have to recruit a relatively high percentage of their muscular strength in each encounter. He contrasts a forward who can squat 120kg with another whose squat is 200kg. The first player may have to use all his strength to push the opposition while the other might be using only 60% of his strength.

The player with strength reserve will be stronger at the end of the game and still have energy to exert on physically over powering the opposition as well as energy to marshal troops maintain discipline and minimise mental errors.

He suggests that out-of-season there is a need for "multiple high intensity low volume work outs to improve muscular hypertrophy and strength gains," while in-season training should be "high intensity (90% of one rep max) low volume 45 minute heavy work-outs." He advocates the use of modified Olympic lifts for explosive workouts both in and out of season.

And when I say explosive, I don't believe that moving light weights fast is explosive, it needs to be heavy weight explosively. ... Gym work-outs are there to make you strong and explosive, they are not there to duplicate how you feel after a rugby game.

In another post to the Supertraining group today, Tatalias drew attention to the effect of changes in the laws of rugby over the past decade. He maintained that while the number of scrums in a game had decreased dramatically, lineouts had become increasingly important with an emphasis on "good vertical jump for the catcher and excellent explosive lifting strength for the lifters (props and flanks)."

He also asserts that "the number of very fast explosive actions such as cleaning out opponents around the ruck have increased as well the emphasis on much more explosive tackling (to prevent the runner crossing the gain line)"; which he compares to run blocking by fullbacks and linebacker type hit tackling in American football. Finally he suggests that rolling mauls now allow for more obstruction and thus can last for more than 60 seconds.

Perhaps not surprisingly, I find Nick Tatalias's arguments quite compelling and further evidence of a groundswell that is slowly but inexorably moving rugby toward an emphasis on serious strength development, particularly in the direction of explosiveness.
rugby
explosive strength
rugby strength
Read more...