Heavy training and tapering - is it a flawed philosophy for football?

[Belnakor]

If a team is going along like Freo or Melbourne, do they just train full tack the whole season? so they are effectively getting a full year of preseason?

 

[Gavin Excell]

And you actually believed that despite the fact that several players; Aker, Higgins, Boyd etc all commented on it last week....Eade telling porky pies as to not look like they were taking Freo and Weagles games lightly to conincide with training, which they were and it backfired.



Exactly, these fitness/sports science guys know there job or they won't have a job. It however is not an exact science and the minute something doesn't quite go to play everyone jumps on it as a total failure (although I don't think losing to Weagles was part of the plan for bulldogs)

Yes true its possible teams that are flying - Saints, pies, are also undertaking heavy load training at this point.

Interesting how Rocket denies it when all evidence points to the contrary.

 

[Wallaby]

There are several problems with AFL teams 'tapering'. First, an AFL side is a team of very different body types and fitness/strength levels and requirements. Also, you still have to be 'up' on a weekly basis, whereas a proper 'taper' is generally aimed at at most a week's worth of performance.

To use Geelong as an example, I imagine Cam Mooney would have very different fitness/training strategies to Gary Ablett. Mooney, being a strength/power/explosive type would probably benefit from shorter, but still maximal sessions to maintain power, while Ablett (being endurance-based)would respond better to a lower intensity level of training. All while maintaining the correct muscle/glycogen levels.

And you need to do this while still doing tactical training - all the game plans etc. Difficult, if some players are on 'light' taper, and some are on long-and-slow taper.

But this only applies to tapering for a week-long performance. Not sure how to apply it to a 4-week finals series where you might have to play every week, or maybe get a week off.

I imagine it is even far more complicated than I have attempted to make out. I think clubs are probably mostly concerned about managing injuries at this time of year.

 

[Chattanooga]

And you actually believed that despite the fact that several players; Aker, Higgins, Boyd etc all commented on it last week....Eade telling porky pies as to not look like they were taking Freo and Weagles games lightly to conincide with training, which they were and it backfired.



Exactly, these fitness/sports science guys know there job or they won't have a job. It however is not an exact science and the minute something doesn't quite go to play everyone jumps on it as a total failure (although I don't think losing to Weagles was part of the plan for bulldogs)

In my opinion Eade is denying it is going on because he is peeved off that the players are pretty much using it as an excuse for poor effort. Clearly it is going on, (you can add Cross's name to the list of players confirming as much post-match on ABC), and just as clearly he is not happy that the players are allowing themselves to think that it might therefore justify putting in a flat performance.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

In my opinion Eade is denying it is going on because he is peeved off that the players are pretty much using it as an excuse for poor effort. Clearly it is going on, (you can add Cross's name to the list of players confirming as much post-match on ABC), and just as clearly he is not happy that the players are allowing themselves to think that it might therefore justify putting in a flat performance.

But then eade is a fool for denying what 3 or 4 other players have confirmed. All he needed to say is that it is no excuse for their performances, even tho common sense tells you that if there are benefits at the end of a heavy cycle, there are costs involved during a heavy cycle.

Another example of football clubs thinking we are fools when the reality is we collectively will find them out

 

[moogerfooger]

I remember talk of Neil Craig employing this approach in 2006 when Crows were flying and good things to win the flag. They fell apart in the last part of the season.

He also did it in 97/98 as fitness coach when it was widely credited as a major factor in winning the two flags, especially in 98 when our last 5 games were on the road.

If managed correctly it can be a big plus. If not, you have an epidemic of soft tissue injuries like we did in 2006. It's always a calculated gamble.

 

[Philhawk]

We actually did it last year as well - but I believe we did it between Rounds 12-16.

I'm a little suprised that teams are doing it so late in the season.

 

[Pessimistic]

one 'proof' of the sysstem would be if the lions used it 2001-3.

Other than that, if we say it fails because a team doesnt win a flag then it is a failure. 15 teams dont win each year and 3-5 of them could be described as contenders.

Theres lots of different aspects to winning a flag and you only call them a success if you win ?

On fitness. Dermie went from the hawks to the Swans in 1993. He said he was surprised at the training regime which was much tougher - he thought it would be the other way round

 

[Grumpy Bum]

He also did it in 97/98 as fitness coach when it was widely credited as a major factor in winning the two flags, especially in 98 when our last 5 games were on the road.

If managed correctly it can be a big plus. If not, you have an epidemic of soft tissue injuries like we did in 2006. It's always a calculated gamble.

An interesting discussion on this very point occured on ABC radio on Sunday. The essence of the debate was that: if it worked 5 years ago, it doesnt necessarily mean it will work now as different teams have different circumstances and new training methods evolving all the time.

The once accepted rule in most sports was to do a heavy training cycle culminating in a peak about 2 to 3 weeks out of comp and then taper leading up to the comp, in this case the finals. Olympic athletes quite often would incoroprate things like altitude training in this type training schedule. But like most things in physical conditioning, what was considered cutting edge 2 years ago, is sometimes no longer considered relevant today.

 

[Royal Flush]

I believe the Dogs employed it last season;

Results 2008 up to r15 13 wins 1 draw 1 loss
r16-22 2 wins 5 losses.

Significant drop in form.

Results 2009 up to R15 11 wins 4 losses.
R16- 2 wins 3 losses.

Not sure if 2008 form slump is a result of this Tapered training philosophy.

 

[Belnakor]

would make sense, they load up going into the finals

 

[greennick]

I remember talk of Neil Craig employing this approach in 2006 when Crows were flying and good things to win the flag. They fell apart in the last part of the season.

Seems to me its all well and good when preparing athletes for one event (eg a marathon) when nothing else really matters in the build up, but in footy, when you have to win games in that heavy workload period, question whether the perceived results outweigh the negatives.

The Crows got beat by West Coast those 2 years. We beat them last year mid season too even though we sucked.

The only reason they didn't win both years was because we were their bogey team and we were flying. Now they have a chance because West Coast won't be in the finals for a few years. I am sure they hope they take their chance before we rise back up to the top.