4/19/07

Comments & Thoughts

I am a bit concerned at the tone of some of the recent posts. I think it is important to respect everyone’s point of view. I need to be more careful myself with the tone of sarcasm. I know from teaching and coaching that sarcasm is a dangerous tool. I want this blog to a forum to stimulate thought and discussion and to exchange meaningful information.

I have thought a lot about the Yankees situation as I have read your comments. I have tried to put myself in that guys place and thought back to what I would have done at age 22 or 34. I am afraid that I would have done the same thing. To me it underscores the need for experience and mentoring as well as definition of the field.

As far as Alex Kipchirchir’s training, there are no secrets. Go to the web page or any of my books and videos and all the elements of the program are there. We did circuits, Pull, Push, Squat complexes, some modified leg circuits and medicine ball core work daily. As far as running drills he did the usual. The thing to remember about Alex is that he played soccer at a fairly high before he began running, that really helped with his coordination.

The difference between training and work is really quite simple. Training is work with a purpose that is specific and measurable. Someone wrote in that training is the boat with a rudder, a good analogy. Work is a boat adrift in the sea. Sometimes it makes it to shore, more often than not it stays adrift.

Feedback from testing. Yesterday we tested the Volleyball girls on block jumps and approach jumps. Predictably those with a base of training and those most compliant with the program improved. Not as much as after the first phase because this past phase was a heavy leg circuit phase. On the other hand on the Over the Back 3kg Med ball throw the improvement was tremendous. The Med Ball results reflected the training emphasis. The point is that testing is feedback related to what you have been doing in training. There are times when you can actually expect regression. If it is part of the plan and you can account for it then it is acceptable if it is within certain ranges.

5 Comments:

At 4/19/07, 1:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Gambetta,
Just wanted to say I was honored that you thought the analogy of the boat to be a good one. I was fortunate to be trained by a very good ATC in college and from there have been guided by the likes of your literature, as well as others who you have partnered with at some point in your career. Although we have never met or spoken to each other I would still consider you one of my mentors in the world of functional training.

Thanks Again,
Jonathan Hewitt ATC

 
At 4/20/07, 1:33 PM, Anonymous Mark C said...

Vern-

How did you approach it when you took over the White Sox Program? Seems like you were setting the standard for baseball conditioning at that time.


Mark C

 
At 4/20/07, 3:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mark

Vern didn't took over or set the standard...he was a pioneer of baseball conditioning.

TC

 
At 4/20/07, 4:29 PM, Anonymous Mark C said...

I guess pioneer is a better term. Was it an easy transition?

MC

 
At 4/23/07, 10:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MC
If you ever get a chance to meet with Greg Latta, he can give you first hand account how the program was implemented.

Ofcourse, there were roadblocks along the way; but more roadways were built as the program continued to develop.

By the time you were in baseball MC, you saw many programs being modeled after the White Sox...especially the warm up.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home