myTrainer.com

Outside of the technical area (game/activity specific skills & tactics) I believe the main criteria of a coach/ trainer in his or her planning and scheduling is to successfully enable them to design an effective, challenging and, equally importantly, fun workout for clients/ athletes of all ability levels. This brings us to the new buzzword in sport and fitness conditioning- “Functional training” with good reason! Functional training exercises recreate both daily living and sport specific activities, thereby strengthening the way the body executes physical activities and stores these functions in the athletes’ muscle memory.

There is no doubt that human movement is extremely complex- the simple act of walking involves multi-faceted motor programming on a subconscious/ reflexive level. This reflexive motor development begins in infancy and continues throughout life, increasing in complexity depending on the task or activity. Many coaches and trainers believe that the effort output while practicing a sport/ participating in a training program is sufficient to improve motor skills. This assertion is based on the premise that athletes cannot get more ‘sport/ activity specific’ training than performing the actual sport/ activity itself, thereby developing everything that goes into creating a well-rounded athlete. It has been noted that neurological transfer of skills is not optimal unless the skill is practiced exactly as it is performed in competition. This suggests that functional training is limited unless the client/ athlete can strength train while practicing the exact skill the coach/ trainer is trying to develop.

The other side of the argument is that isolation /component training, i.e. breaking down complex movements into “bite size chunks” is the best way to go about optimizing the highly complex integrated motor skills related to dynamic athletic performance. Complex movements can be simplified, and any deficiencies corrected and improved through chaining simple skills, resulting in improved efficiency and execution of the complex movements associated with sport/ physical activity. This school of thought therefore maintains that the purpose of strength training should be to increase strength – skill improvement is therefore best accomplished on the field/ court/ pool etc. This is born out by studies, which suggest that physical activity or movements have their own neurological pathway, and there would not necessarily be a positive transfer or carry over of skill just because of a similarity in movement mechanics.

Most of us are aware of periodization, yet few coaches/trainers integrate this fully into their team/ clients' training programs. There may be many reasons for this, and I believe that this is due to the complexity of the theory rather than the practice itself. Most coaches/ trainers are using the theory without knowing it and fall down when it comes to progressions of intensity, load variation, athlete/ client needs, sport or activity requirements etc.

Functional exercises recruit multiple joints and muscle groups simultaneously and, synergistically, allowing for a more productive work out. The design of a functional training program must challenge the stabilizer muscles of the abdomen and back (the core) and incorporate all manner of multi-axial movements/ exercises with unrestricted ranges of motion. This will result in a full body workout that increases functional strength as opposed to linear strength, resulting in athletes/ clients experiencing improved coordination, balance, core and general stability and ultimately, better performance. When engaging a client/ athlete in a Functional training program, the coach/ athlete should apply the FAST principle (Functional Appropriate Specific Training) to their training protocols.

Benefits & Limitations of Functional Training (©2004 Vertex Fitness, LLC All Rights Reserved)

Functional training may prove effective for individuals who need to improve balance, stability, and neuromuscular coordination. Because functional exercise involves balancing the body over varying types of surfaces, a person with balance issues may find this type of training beneficial.

Although functional exercise can provide benefit if used in the proper manner, there are limitations. Most if not all, functional exercises fail to supply constant variable resistance throughout an entire range of motion. This is a limitation because an individual will not increase their strength through the full range of motion.

Functional training may also be limited when it comes to properly overloading the musculature during a session. There is only a certain amount of weight one can bench press while balancing on a stability ball. A fundamental principle of any strength training program is that of overload, which means that the musculature must be required to contract against heavy resistance (relative to one’s current level of strength), therefore providing a new stimulus to the muscle thus increasing strength. If the resistance used in a given workout is significantly below an individual’s capability (as it would likely need to be in order to maintain balance on a ball), it is difficult, at best, to improve strength.

Another limiting factor may be that it is very difficult to measure and monitor an individual’s progress. This is attributed to the extraneous variables that come into play with functional training, such as variations in speed of movement, and the use of resistance that can’t be measured (such as elastic bands) Finally, since the functional trainee must concentrate on both intense training and balance simultaneously, the risk of injury is increased.

Like any new training fad or program, safety of the athlete/ client is paramount when it comes to designing or introducing a Functional training program. Functional training, if employed, should always be performed under the close scrutiny of a coach/ trainer familiar with both Functional training protocol, and the abilities of the individual.

References:

1.        Bompa, Tudor. Periodization: Theory and Methodology of Training. Human Kinetics.

2.        Chiu L, Barnes J L. The Fitness Fatigue Model Revisited: Implications for Planning Short and Long Term Training. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Volume 25, number 6, Pages 42-51.

3. Jackson, C.G.R., Dickson A.L. and Ringel, S.P. 1990. Skeletal muscle fibre area alterations in two opposing modes of resistance-exercise training in the same Individuals. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.