Tag: hockey training program

Rethinking Bilateral Training

Over the last 5 years I’ve written over 650 articles for this site. It’s a little crazy to think about!

Because of the sheer volume of content, I find myself answering a lot of emails these days by searching for old articles I’ve written that answer the person’s question and just firing them back over. The reality is that I may be the only person among us that has read every one. In short, there is probably some good stuff that you guys are missing out on!

It’s for this reason that I’m starting a new “Throwback Thursday” series that will highlight an article from the past that still contains information that is relevant today. This will be a great way to reignite some conversation and discuss what (if any) changes in philosophy/training methods have resulted since these were first written. Today we’ll kick things off with an article that covers what I still feel is a fairly controversial topic (extremists on both ends). Enjoy!

Rethinking Bilateral Training

Bilateral training frequents athletic development programs everywhere.  By bilateral I mean both legs or arms working simultaneously to produce force/motion in the same direction.  Exercises such as front squats, deadlifts, standing shoulder press, and bent over row are just a few examples.  While bilateral training and the associated exercises are deeply rooted in the history of strength training, it may be time to reconsider their use.  Heresy you say?

I’m certainly not the first to make this suggestion.  Michael Boyle has been making the case for single-leg training for years now.  After reading one of his articles on the topic, I began thinking more about the lack of respect single-leg training receives.  As the article mentions, people are probably reluctant to use single-leg training because they require less external load.  This raises a few more questions.  Is external load completely indicative of internal stress to the muscle?  If so, is neglecting the movement pattern and maximizing the external load really the goal of training athletes?  The article also mentions the “functional” inclusion of the medial and lateral musculature of the hips that is present in single-leg training and not bilateral training, functional being defined as “training the muscles that we’re using in the way that we use them.”

I want to preface the rest of this article by stating that I’m not yet calling for a complete abandonment of bilateral training.  Instead I simply want to present some of the research supporting the empirical evidence that Coach Boyle presented in his T-nation article.  In light of the available research on the nervous system, a working knowledge of functional anatomy, and injuries associated with heavy spinal loading, I think it is time to reconsider the efficacy of predominantly bilateral training programs.

Neural Hinderance?

A look into the literature on the nervous system’s role in force production revealed an interesting occurrence known as the bilateral deficit.  For those of you that aren’t familiar, the bilateral deficit simply describes the fact that the sum of individual extremity force production is greater than bilateral force production (1-5).  In other words, if you performed a one-legged knee extension with your left leg only, then your right leg only, and added these two forces together, they would be greater than if you performed a knee extension with both legs together.  Bilateral Deficit: Leg A + Leg B > Both Legs
In fact, the bilateral deficit is said to be as large as 20% (6,7) during slow contractions and as high as 45% (7,8) during rapid contractions!  Luckily, researchers were quick to monitor the changes in this relationship following a bilateral resistance training program and found that the deficit decreased.  In some instances the relationship even reversed so that both legs produced more force than the sum of individual leg efforts (9,10).  Phew!  Disaster averted.

Neural scientists refer to the bilateral deficit as a phenomenon.  I would question whether it is a phenomenal occurrence or a long-term adaptation to repeated movements.  As many of you already know, performing a movement repeatedly strengthens the associated neural circuitry resulting in improved force production.  In the words of my old neurobiology professor, “Neurons that fire together, wire together.”  This is the primary explanation for why novice lifters can experience rapid gains in strength in the first eight weeks of training.

Is it possible that the bilateral deficit is simply a life-long adaptation to producing force on one-leg?  I realize that no one grows up performing one-legged squats off their kitchen stools on a daily basis, but think about the movements we perform regularly, notably walking and running.  While one leg is producing a triple-extension force, the other is usually producing a triple-flexion force.  Let’s come back to the knee-extension example.  In consideration of the “neurons that fire together, wire together” statement, it would make sense that as one leg is extending the neural circuitry is telling the other to flex.  This pattern predominates in most human movements: walking, skipping, running, and even crawling!

The neural circuitry to explain this pattern is well-established.  Some of you may have been introduced to it through the flexor crossed-extensor reflex.  In this example, if someone steps on a sharp object or other painful stimulus, they will withdrawal that leg by flexing the hip and knee.  At the same time, they will extend the hip and knee on the other leg.  This is a stabilization mechanism.  If both hips and knees flexed, you’d like end up sitting on the painful stimulus you’re trying to avoid.  Basically, as the flexor group on one limb is excited, the contralateral flexor group is inhibited, and the contralateral extensor group is excited.

What does this have to do with athletes?

We are wired to effectively produce unilateral movements.  Athletics involve unilateral movements.  Most strength and conditioning programs revolve around bilateral movements.  Why?  I understand the benefits of including single-leg training is being increasingly recognized and that more unilateral training is being prescribed.  However, it still seems that we’re adding some single-leg training to a double-leg program, instead of the other way around.  What happens if we abandon double-leg training altogether?  Compared to double-leg training, single-leg training:

1. Requires greater force production from more muscles. Picking up one leg immediately requires greater force production from the hip abductors and adductors (among others) to stabilize the pelvis.  Some of the affected muscles would include: pectineus, adductor brevis, adductor longus, adductor magnus, gracilis, obturator internus, obturator externus, gluteus maximus, gluteus minimus, gluteus medius, psoas major, iliacus, sartorius, gemelli inferior, gemelli superior, piriformis, and tensor fascia latae.

2. Increases the proprioceptive and sensory demand. Decreasing stability by narrowing the base of support will absolutely necessitate greater proprioceptive and sensory feedback to maintain balance.

3. Decreases spinal loading. I’ve heard a saying a few times that goes something like “Live your life the wrong way, you’ll end up in a cardiologist office.  Live your life the right way, you’ll end up in an orthopedic office.”  This has come to be accepted as an inevitable truth.  Research supports the idea that repetitive heavy spinal loading, as is common in long-term weightlifting, results in a myriad of spinal issues including an increased incidence of spondylosis (11), decrease in intervertebral disc height (12), lumbar spine degeneration (13).  But does it need to be this way?  If we can maintain or even improve the quality of the stimulus to the muscle and cut the external load in half, could some of these injuries be prevented?

4. Reinforces the neural circuitry common to most athletic movements. The majority of athletic movements occur from one-leg or a staggered stance.  Could this more similar training approach help to decrease the incidence of injury?  I’m thinking specifically of hamstring strains and ankle sprains.  Hamstring strength absolutely plays a role in preventing hamstring strains.  But how do we explain the athletes with monstrous hamstrings that suffer an injury?  Bad running form?  Maybe.  Is it possible that these strains are occurring due to a neural mishap associated with hamstring momentarily attempting to contract concentrically bilaterally when one side should be lengthening?  The causative factors associated with ankle sprains remain relatively allusive, but there does seem to be some evidence that decreased proprioception and increased peroneal stretch reflex latency may be related to ankle injury.  As a global factor, fatigue seems to be related to injury, with more injuries occurring as fatigue increases.  Of interest is that muscle fatigue is training-specific, meaning that if double-leg training predominates, the athletes will resist fatigue more efficiently in double-leg movements than single-leg movements.9  Naturally, the opposite is also true.  Both of those factors are neural in nature, and may be positively affected by the increased demand on the sensory system provided by single-leg training.  Prior history seems to be the greatest predictor of future injury.  Therefore, if we can prevent an injury from ever happening, we significantly decrease the risk of future occurrences.

Admittedly, some of the proposed benefits of single-leg training on injury prevention are speculative.  There is a clear list of benefits to single-leg training, however, that shouldn’t be overlooked.  While I believe that largely moving away from double-leg training is premature (and somewhat scary), I think it is worth considering.  Albert Einstein once said, “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.”  Weigh the pros and cons associated with eliminating double-leg training.  Is it time for a change?

StrengthCoach.com

This article was originally published on StrengthCoach.com, an athletic development website where some of the world’s experts in strength and conditioning print their articles and discuss current issues.

To your success,

Kevin Neeld
OptimizingMovement.com
UltimateHockeyTraining.com

Please enter your first name and email below to sign up for my FREE Athletic Development and Hockey Training Newsletter!

Get Optimizing Movement Now!

“…one of the best DVDs I’ve ever watched”
“A must for anyone interested in coaching and performance!”

Optimizing Movement DVD Package

Click here for more information >> Optimizing Movement

References

1.    Obtsuki, T. (1983). Decrease in human voluntary isometric arm strength induced by simultaneous bilateral exertion. Behavioural Brain Research, 7, 165-178.
2.    Schantz, P., Moritani, T., Karlson, E., Johansson, E., & Lundh, A. (1989). Maximal voluntary force of bilateral and unilateral leg extension. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 136, 185-192.
3.    Secher, N., Rorsgaard, S., & Secher, O. (1978). Contralateral influence on recruitment of curarized muscle fibres during maximal voluntary extension of the legs. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 103, 456-462.
4.    Secher, N., Rube, N., & Ellers, J. (1988). Strength of two- and one-leg extension in man. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 134, 333-339.
5.    Taniguchi, Y. (1998). Relationship between the modifications of bilateral deficit in upper and lower limbs by resistance training in humans. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 78, 226-230.
6.    Howard, J., & Enoka, R. (1991). Maximum bilateral contractions are modified by neurally mediated interlimb effects. Journal of Applied Physiology, 70, 306-316.
7.    Koh, T., Grabiner, M., & Clough, C. (1993). Bilateral deficit is larger for step than for ram isometric contractions. Journal of Applied Physiology, 74, 1200-1205.
8.    Vandervoort, A., Sale, D., & Moroz, J. (1984). Comparison of motor unit activation during unilateral and bilateral leg extension. Journal of Applied Physiology, 56, 46-51.
9.    Rube, N., & Secher, N. (1990). Effect of training on central factors in fatigue following two- and one-leg static exercise in man. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 141, 87-95.
10.     Enoka, R. (1997). Neural adaptations with chronic physical activity. Journal of Biomechanics, 30, 447-455.
11.     Aggrawal, N., Kaur, R., Kumar, S., & Mathur, D. (1979). A study of changes in the spine in weight lifters and other athletes. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 13, 58-61.
12.    Granhed, H., & Morelli, B. (1988). Low back pain among retired wrestlers and heavyweight lifters. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 16, 530-533.
13.     Videman, T., Sarna, S., Battie, M., Koskinen, S., Gill, K., Paananen, H., & Gibbons, L. (1995). The long-term effects of physical loading and exercise lifestyles on back-related symptoms, disability, and spinal pathology among men. Spine, 20, 699-709.

In-Season Youth Hockey Training Program

A few days back, I posted an article discussing several things that need to be considered when designing an in-season hockey training program. While this was really framed within the context of hockey, the reality is that these same principles are relevant for every sport, and for every time of year. If you missed that post, I’d encourage you to check it out here: 5 In-Season Hockey Training Considerations

Today I wanted to follow up on the topic of in-season hockey training by sharing the intro phase we’re using for our youth midget-aged players. This is just one of several programs posted to the Ultimate Hockey Training Insider’s Section each month, which along with the 800+ video database, is a great resource for those of you looking for a little more structure to your programs and some new exercise ideas.

Ultimate Hockey Training-Membership Card Insider Small
The goal of sharing this program isn’t necessarily to give you something to print and use, but to help refer back to some of the topics covered in the previous article and provide some real life examples of how we’re implementing those concepts in our setting.

Phase 1: Day 1

A1) Hang Clean Technique: 3×5
A2) Glute Bridge: 3x(3x10s)
B1) Front Squat: (2-0-2 Tempo): 3×6
B2) 1-Arm DB Row: (2-0-2 Tempo): 3×6/side
C1) Slideboard Hamstring Curl: 3×8
C2) DB Chest Press: 3×8
D1) Split Squat IsoHold: 3x30s/side
D2) Front Plank: 3x25s
D3) Side Plank: 3x20s/side

Phase 1: Day 2

A1) Hang Clean Technique: 3×5
A2) MiniBand Knees Out: 3x(6x5s)
B1) Stiff-Legged Deadlift (2-0-2 Tempo): 3×6
B2) Loaded Push-Up (2-0-2 Tempo): 3×6
C1) DB Reverse Lunge: 3×8/side
C2) Chin-Up: 3×6
D1) 2-Way Skater: 3×12/side
D2) Front Plank: 3x25s
D3) Side Plank: 3x20s

This is “Week 2” of this program. Week 1 started out with one less set for the B-D blocks and a little less time for the planks and IsoHold. Every training session is preceded by foam rolling and a dynamic warm-up. Being an “Intro” phase, the primary goals of this program are to:

  1. Familiarize every player with the PROCESS of proper training. Simply, I want players to internalize the daily process of foam rolling, warming up, training under a structured program with a coach, and then stretching.
  2. Have all of the player learn how to perform all of the primary exercises properly. Many will be familiar with some of these movements already. Some will pick up the new ones quickly; others will not. Exercise technique, like any skill, requires practice. My philosophy is that hockey players (and athletes…and everyone else) need to learn to move well before they move faster, under load, or more often. As a result, Phase 1 puts a primary emphasis on motor learning, which helps create a foundation of quality movement and exercise proficiency that we can build on in the future.
  3. Allow players to acclimate to practicing 2-3 days per week, playing 2-4 games on the weekends and training 2 days per week on top of it. With the increased on-ice load that comes from the start of the season, it’s important to remember that we can’t just keep adding more and more training stress to the athletes and expect them to recover. This drastic increase in on-ice work also comes with increased travel demands, and coincides with starting school, which means extremely long days (up at 6am, home from practice at 10pm, off of Twitter by 12, up at 6 again). In-season training in general, but especially the first phase, should be kept fairly low volume to account for this and ensure that the training isn’t pushing them past the threshold of stress they’re able to recover from.

Returning back to the previous article, we can break down this program in light of the 5 recommendations I made.

1) Age of the Player/Stage of Development
Midget-aged players are in the tail end of the “Speed 2” and “Stamina” window and entering the “Strength” window. This first phase, as mentioned above, is more motor learning (one of the goals of the 2-0-2 tempo is to slow the motion down and allow the players to feel their way through the full range) than strength oriented, but this phase is laying the foundation for the strength work to come. The next phase uses an almost identical exercise list, but the loads, sets, reps, and tempos are altered in a way that still emphasizes the motor learning component, but puts a greater emphasis on strength. There is a clear component of local muscular endurance (one form of stamina) for the lower body/hip musculature with split squat isohold and high-rep 2-way skater exercises, but because both of them are fairly isometric in nature, they won’t result in a lot of soreness. Improved focus on strength in the future will support the speed work that players are getting on the ice.

2) On-Ice Demands
Players at this age group train at our facility 3-4 days per week in the off-season (U-16s tend to be 3, U-18s are 4). Training sessions tend to be 75-90 minutes. When the season starts, the kids are only training 2 days per week for 60 minutes, with about 15-20 of those minutes spent on low stress things like foam rolling, warming up, stretching, etc. In short, the training volume is drastically reduced. Also, you’ll note that sprints, plyometrics, slideboarding, shuttle runs, etc. are all missing from this program. While I think there is a place for some of this work in in-season programs, in general players at this age group are getting the majority of their speed, power, and interval-based conditioning work on the ice. We return to some of these qualities in one form or another in future phases, but definitely not the first one.

3) Practice Plan/Game Schedule/Travel Demands
This part can get a little trickier depending on how much the hockey coach communicates with our coaches. We aren’t always aware of the on-ice practice plan, which isn’t ideal, but is understandable at this level. That said, we almost always know when teams have a big weekend (important games and/or 3-4 games), and can adjust the program accordingly. There are lots of different strategies to alter training stresses before or after a big game, but some of the ones we use most frequently are:

  1. Doing one less set of all the exercises
  2. Cutting loads down so all sets are completed easily, putting an emphasis on perfect form and moving through the lift quickly to create more of an aerobic effect
  3. Only performing the explosive movement and core work (the A and D blocks above, but without isoholds or 2-way skaters)
  4. Bailing on the lift altogether and simply spend extra time rolling, warming up, and stretching

Periodically, the coach will just cancel off-ice, which isn’t always a bad thing. For example, we had one team play 10 games in the last two weekends and cancel a few off-ice training sessions during that stretch. While I don’t necessarily think anyone (especially not players at this age) should play 1/4 of a college hockey season in two weekends, I do think given the ridiculous fatigue accumulated in ONE weekend like this, let alone two, makes canceling training the right call.

4) Soft-Tissue/Muscle Stresses
All of the players foam roll, warm up, and stretch every day they’re with us. The stretching puts a very lopsided emphasis on stretching the glutes/posterior hip region, which I’ve found to be an effective strategy in helping players recover from and minimize risk for groin and hip flexor strains. We also steer clear of any focused work from a training standpoint for these areas during the first phase because of the on-ice load put on these muscle groups.

5) Logistical Considerations
Over the last year, we were able to acquire a larger space at the rink to train the youth players that play there, and we also moved more equipment over so space and equipment constraints aren’t as bad as they used to be. It’s certainly come a long way from doing all body weight work in the winter in the parking lot or rink lobby! I remember teaching 20 U-16 players with minimal lifting experience how to hang clean in an old party room that could be more than 700 sq ft. While far from ideal, I believe strongly that those situations are where you can really learn how to coach, and the kids learn to stay focused because there simply isn’t enough space to screw around. All of that said, part of the simplicity of these programs is to account for the ~16-20:1 Athlete:Coach ratio we’re working with. Again, a program is only as effective as the athletes’ ability to perform it correctly. As a result, there shouldn’t be anything in the program that we don’t feel comfortable coaching. In the past, we used more “Tri-Sets” (e.g. A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, etc.), but have backed away from that this year in an effort to keep things simpler and a little more organized from a traffic flow standpoint.

Hopefully that gives you an idea of the rationale for how I’ve designed our in-season programs and provides a few real life examples of how to implement the information mentioned here: 5 In-Season Hockey Training Considerations

If you want access to more training programs and the largest hockey training exercise database out there, be sure to check out the Ultimate Hockey Training Insider’s Section! As always, if you have any questions, please post them below!

To your success,

Kevin Neeld
OptimizingMovement.com
UltimateHockeyTraining.com

Please enter your first name and email below to sign up for my FREE Athletic Development and Hockey Training Newsletter!

Ultimate Hockey Transformation

Ultimate Hockey Transformation Pro Package-small

Ultimate Hockey Transformation is the follow-up training program series to Ultimate Hockey Training, and features year-round hockey-specific off-ice training programs for players at the U-14 age level and above.  The Ultimate Hockey Transformation system includes:

  1. In- and off-season training programs for players at the U-14, U-16, U-18, and Junior/College levels totaling 120 weeks of programming!
  2. 228 high quality videos demonstrating how to perform every exercise in the program with perfect technique
  3. A 65-page manual outlining everything you need to know to successfully use the Ultimate Hockey Transformation system!
  4. Specific warm-ups, corrective exercise, and cooldowns to help you maximize your training preparedness and recovery
  5. A Performance Profiling Sheet so you can track your progress over time
  6. The UHT Recovery Monitoring Log so you can prevent overtraining before it occurs!

Simply, following the RIGHT training program can completely alter the course of your career. Propel your game to the next level by following training programs proven to deliver game-changing results!

Results backed by 100% Money Back Guarantee!

Top Hockey Training and Development Posts of 2012

With 2013 officially upon us, I thought it would be a good time to recap some of the highlights of 2012. On a personal note, 2012 has been an incredible year. Some of the highlights, in no particular order:

1) Starting and finishing a massage program at Lourdes Institute of Wholistic Studies
2) Becoming Lower Extremity and Spine ART certified
3) Completing my first full year with the US Women’s National Hockey Team, including working at the IIHF World Championships in Burlington, VT and at the USOC in Colorado Springs
4) Releasing my book Ultimate Hockey Training
5) Writing a chapter for the recently released Men’s Health Big Book of Abs
6) Being featured twice in Men’s Fitness
7) Endeavor Sports Performance moving into our new facility (which I was able to design from scratch) within Total Turf Experience in Pitman, NJ
8) Making the move to Collingswood, NJ so I don’t have to pay that absurd $5 toll to get back to Philly every night!
9) Having an opportunity to speak to both 198 ’98 birth year hockey players through a USA Hockey Festival Camp in Colorado Springs, and to ~200 attendees at the USA Hockey Level 4 Coaching Clinic in New Jersey.
10) Training a few of the Flyers during the lockout
11) Last, but certainly not least, winning my first ever Ugly Christmas Sweater award!

Ugly Christmas Sweater

Special shout out to Emily and her siblings, who apparently bought what could very well be the most ridiculous sweater I’ve ever seen for their mom when they were little kids!

I’ve had a lot of fun over the last year and have been fortunate to have gotten to know and spend some time learning from a lot of new people. This site also experienced an incredible growth over the last year, reaching 304,065 page views, up from 188,160 in 2011. This is ALL thanks to your continued support and help in spreading the word about articles that you’ve found some value in. I truly appreciate your support and can’t thank you enough. I’m hoping to make 2013 the best year yet, so please feel free to speak up if there are specific topics you want me to write about.

With all of that said, let’s move on to some of the top hockey training and hockey development posts of 2012. The series will continue throughout the week with some of the other top features of the year, so stay tuned!

  1. Off-Season Hockey Training Program
  2. A Letter to Parents of Undersized Players (My favorite post of the year!)
  3. Understanding USA Hockey’s American Development Model
  4. What Muscles Do You Use To Shoot?
  5. The Myth of Wrist Strength in Hockey
  6. 3 Keys to Developing Optimal Skating Technique
  7. Unconventional Approaches to First Step Quickness
  8. Improving Shot Power Through Rotational Core Training
  9. Hip Active Isolated Stretching for Hockey Players

To your success,

Kevin Neeld
UltimateHockeyTraining.com

Please enter your first name and email below to sign up for my FREE Athletic Development and Hockey Training Newsletter!

Matching On- and Off-Ice Demands

A while back I wrote a post outlining the physical qualities that can be trained at the same time without creating too large of a conflicting stimulus to the body. As I’ve mentioned in the past, attempting to train conflicting qualities at the same time (think powerlifting and marathon training) will result in the training efforts interfering with the adaptation of the other, and ultimately a blunted response to both. There are a myriad of ways to design programs to minimize this interference and progress to peak for a certain quality or group of qualities (e.g. progress from hypertrophy -> strength -> power -> speed).

You can’t be both

While no periodization model (read: planning) is perfect, I think when an individual has a relatively advanced training age (e.g. 5+ years of structured strength and conditioning ), the more targeted a given training phase will need to be to continue to make progress. In other words, it’ll be that much more important that phases are designed using almost entirely complimentary qualities (as outlined here: A New Perspective on Program Design), using a minimum volume of conflicting qualities to help maintain previously built levels.

During the off-season, it’s ideal to frame on-ice work within the same targets as the off-ice work. In other words, if you’re focusing off-ice efforts on developing maximum speed or power, which primarily rely upon alactic energy systems, and then you bag yourself on the ice with a lot of lactic work, the on-ice work will actually impair your off-ice efforts. This certainly isn’t to say that you’d gain some on-ice benefits from skating and handling a puck, only that there is a more targeted/optimal approach to take.

Recently I’ve had an opportunity to consult with some high level players about this very topic. Below is an example of the plan I put together for one, based on a preexisting skating schedule.

Monday: Upper Body/Skill Work

  1. Off-Ice: Upper Body Lift 1
    1. Conditioning: Mobility Circuit (2x through)
  2. On-Ice: Low IntensitySkill Work
    1. Skating Technique Work
      1. Goal to Goal: Slow forward skating focusing on optimal body position, stride angle and extension. Progress in speed to ultimately ramp up to full speed by far blue.
        1. 50% x 2-3
        2. 75% x 2-3
        3. 100% x 2 (ramping up to 100%)
      2. Faceoff Circle: Crossover skating focusing on driving under with the cross-under leg. Progress to faster strides around the circle.
        1. 2-3 x ~20s/side
          1. Last Rep should ramp up to full speed for ~8-10s
      3. Goal to Goal: Inside and outside edge holds, forward and backward. Progress to tighter turns.
        1. 2x/edge/direction (2 on inside and outside edge each, forward and backward; 8 trips total)
    2. Puck Work
      1. Puck handling on all sides of the body (front, back, left, right). Ramp up speed, weight shifts, width of puck handling, and transition between positions.
      2. Stationary shots from different areas of the ice
      3. Quick movements into shots (< ~3 strides before shooting; should only take 2-3 seconds and shouldn’t be overly taxing)

Tuesday: Lower Body/Intense Practice

  1. Off-Ice: Lower Body Lift 1
    1. Conditioning 1 (Pick 1; Listed in order of preference)
  2. On-Ice: Practice
    1. Focus on short, high-intensity drills if possible.

Wednesday: Active Recovery

  1. Off-Ice: Active Recovery
    1. Foam Roll: Front, lateral, medial, and posterior thigh, glutes, lower back, upper back, lats/armpits
    2. Modified Mobility Circuit: 3x through
  2. On-Ice: NO SKATE

Thursday: Lower Body/Intense Practice

  1. Off-Ice: Lower Body Lift 2
    1. Conditioning 2 (Pick 1; Listed in order of preference)
  2. On-Ice: Practice
    1. Can incorporate longer (e.g. 10-20s) high-intensity drills

Friday: Upper Body/Skill Work

  1. Off-Ice: Upper Body Lift 2
    1. Conditioning: Mobility Circuit (2x through)
  2. On-Ice: Low IntensitySkill Work
    1. Same as above

Saturday: Active Recovery

  1. Off-Ice: Active Recovery
    1. Foam Roll: Front, lateral, medial, and posterior thigh, glutes, lower back, upper back, lats/armpits
    2. Modified Mobility Circuit: 3x through
  2. On-Ice: NO SKATE

Sunday: GAME

Hopefully this gives you an idea of how on- and off-ice work can be designed in a complimentary fashion to maximize development and avoid (to the extent possible) sending conflicting signals to the body, ultimately allowing for a deeper, more significant adaptation.

In a future post, I’ll post the “Mobility/Recovery Circuit” and Conditioning recommendations alluded to above so you can see how they line-up with the on-ice work. Stay tuned and, as always, please post your questions below!

To your success,

Kevin Neeld

Please enter your first name and email below to sign up for my FREE Athletic Development and Hockey Training Newsletter!

Use CODE: "Neeld15" to save 15%