The Proof is in the Pudding
When Martin and I outlined Bondarchuk’s approach to periodization at our seminars in December we received a few comments that, while it sounds great in theory, it could not be implemented in a high school or college setting. College coaches are under pressure to produce results fast, the argument goes, and traditional methods work better over the short-term. Others said that this may work for elite athletes but that high school athletes need to build a better base before moving on to a more complex method that includes emphasis on specific exercises out of season. Last month Derek put together a great comparison of different approaches to periodization, but one thing he didn’t address were arguments like these.
Sorry, this content is for members only.Click here to get access.
Already a member? Login below… |
I have used a Bonderchouk approach with high School hammer throwers and shot putters. The results have always been excellent. We have always had good year to year gains. The strength gains may be slower but what people forget is that slow but steady gains add up over time. For instance a 5lbs a month gain in a lift is 60lbs a year and 150 lbs gain after 3 years assuming a HS athlete trains 10 months a year.
Joe
Great to see your name. Love the slow but steady strength gains for the developmental athlete. Unfortunately in the US There are two major issues with this tortoise versus the rabbit approach.
Just about every power athlete is either involved in football or maximum lifting is encouraged or The NC AA scholarship system with pressure to score points skews the process