Is the "Perfect Model" always perfect and the pitching guru wars

SMART POWER FOR PITCHERS: SMART POWER TRAINING SYSTEMS FOR PITCHERS

				SMART POWER FOR PITCHERS: SMART POWER TR... The following is a response from Paul Nyman to a post on the internet about over and underload training: The ...
				View on www.setpro.com	Preview by Yahoo

This was the tail end of one of my exchanges with Paul Nyman @ SETPRO one of the early pioneers in the pitching guru wars. He was pretty good with advanced training methods for hitters as well.

The following is a response from Paul Nyman to a post on the internet about over and underload training:

The Slav,

Words can be very difficult medium for communication. Stress for a marathoner is different than stress for a pitcher.

Stress to me means elevating the level of activity beyond the point of normal activity.

So if a person is normally throwing a baseball at 80 mph, we must find a way to elevate the stress on his body beyond the 80 mph level.

There is both physical and mental stress.

One of the least understood training issues is the need to create explosive "intent".

Without opening a can of worms, tribe999 asked the question of what is a difference in philosophy in between "other programs" and SETPRO's.

One significant difference is my belief that we need to train the intent to throw hard as opposed to following a mechanical sequence.

The way that pitching mechanics is being taught (in general) is by "picture association".

In other words a visual and verbal representation of the pitching process is used to convey the "external" picture (information) of the pitching process.

It is then left for the person doing is picture or reading the words to "internalize" this information into a sequence (motor program) of posture and muscular actions.

The problem with this is that a lot of the important information cannot be or should I say is not being transmitted by many of these pitching programs, pitching.com being one of them.

And it is not because they are intentionally doing this. It's because they just don't know how to create a richer picture (more information that can be used to more effectively create the internal actions necessary).

In short this is a long-winded way of my saying there's a difference between a pitcher being mechanical and having good mechanics (maximizing his potemtial).

I don't subscribe to the principal that if you work on your mechanics "that velocity will come".

Your velocity will not happen unless you make it happen.

If this occurs because of a specific pitching program, that all well and good.

But is not the pitching program that develops your velocity, it is YOU the player that develops the velocity.

The pitching program is/was only a means for you to achieve that.

I guess you might say that I have a more "holistic" approach to developing pitchers.

As opposed to the cure by "prescription" approach.

Anyway, back to the question of stress.

By definition as long as the effort to throw as hard as possible is there, throwing a different weight baseball has the possibility of creating greater stress.

One of the physiological aspects of the body that I don't think is really understood as much as it should by those who wish to improve their ballistic performance i.e. throwing or swinging a baseball bat, is a fact that muscular response is not linear to the force applied.

I see this phenomenon very clearly if you measure the velocity of a player throwing different weighted baseballs.

Many players can throw a 6 ounce baseball as hard (same velocity) as a five ounce baseball. Even though the 6 ounce baseball is 20 percent heavier than a five ounce baseball. This is a great illustration (to me anyways) that this particular player(s) is not trained to their maximum throwing capabilities.

The reason I say this is because with players that I work with who I believe are throwing a very high-level in terms of their potential, there is a noticeable or significant difference in velocity of their throwing a regulation five ounce baseball as compared to a 6 ounce baseball.

The same is true with them throwing a five ounce baseball as compared to a four ounce baseball.

So therefore players inability to throw a 6 ounce baseball almost as hard as a five ounce baseball indicates that there is undeveloped potential primarily in the form of neuromuscular capabilities.

And in fact significant gains can be made in short periods of time due to neuromuscular recruitment as opposed to developing additional muscle strength.

The intent to throw hard, the intent to swing hard is every bit if not more important than the actual building a strength of the muscle itself.

And we continue to "bump heads" with the specificity principal. Especially the higher we attempt to rise in our athletic capabilities.

I believe that longer durations or lower level throwing, and we have to be very careful asked what we mean by lower level, can be beneficial because my belief that prolong stress, assuming its above a certain level, will lead to physical adaptations in the form of increased tissue size (tendons and ligaments in particular).

And we have to be very careful in what is meant by duration and intensity.

But low level throwing will not in itself develop the neural systems to be explosive.

For those people or very involved in trying to understand how the body develops athletic power, there are different classifications for this power.

As example for football the training professional is more concerned with strength-speed development.

This is different than what the baseball trainer is concerned with for a pitcher, that being speed-strength development.

As far as Coop DeRenne's program, I think is a very good and very safe program to use.

I believe the SETPRO program goes beyond what DeRenne's program started (my sales pitch for today).

As far as MLB and college coaching and training philosophy, I agree 100 percent that their primary job is to maintain a player's ability to perform everyday. As opposed to maximizing their daily performance.

When I was in Atlanta at the National Strength and Conditioning Sport Specific Training Seminar for Baseball, the head training person for the Cleveland Indians said that if a player injured himself because he was doing something that the trainer recommended and was not part of the normal training routine for that athlete then the next day he would be out looking for a new job.

Dr. Frank Fultz of the Atlanta Braves related the same story about Chipper Jones. That Chipper Jones have to come to him and that Chipper have to take total responsibility for his decisions before Dr. Fultz would designed a more aggressive training program for Chipper. This training program resulted in Chipper Jones increasing his strength significantly and going from 20 plus homeruns to 50 homeruns the next season.

I have said hundreds of times that if you expect to perform at the highest level you have to accept the risk of this expectation.

But the key point is that it is "managed" risk.

You use sound training principles, something which most baseball people haven't or won't learn about.

Training principles that former "high jumpers" knew about thirty years ago.

Principles that former major league pitchers or s should I say say someone who pitched three innings in the Major Leagues has no idea about.

Slav, I'm sorry, your post was such a good one, good questions and no sarcasm, but I couldn't resist.

Paul Nyman

Theses discussions around a set of "perfect" pitching mechanics came back to me front and center when I heard Mark Prior on MLB/Sirius say that he "cringed" when he heard the term used to describe his mechanics.

https://www.si.com/thecauldron/2016/08/03/mark-prior-chicago-cubs-no-regrets

Given what happened, I still grimace when I think about those people who said I had perfect mechanics. The Kershaws, the Greinkes, the Arrietas — even they have times when their mechanics are off, and they are the best pitchers on the planet. As a pitcher, there are just times when you feel like you can’t sync up; when your sequence is off. That’s a big part of a pitcher’s responsibility: To execute and to find that groove. I never thought my mechanics were perfect. I just thought that I had a solid delivery that suited my body. I threw the way I had been taught; the way I had since I was six years old.

This was Tom House's doing, using words more to sell than to inform, but it is what it is. If I were to apply the term "perfect" to anyone's mechanics, and I would use the word optimal, it would be Nolan Ryan, who threw 95+ from 19 years old to 45 years old at the MLB level, without much injury down time, except his blister problems early in his career, which may have been related to his National Guard duties. Next, would be Tom Seaver. 

We've come full circle in trying to change arm-slots and mechanics around some pre-conceived models, that we almost ruined guys like Jake Arieta, Clayton Kershaw, Madison Bumgarner and others, who were changed, floundered and then insisted on their own that they were going to either succeed or fail by doing it "My Way" like Sinatra.

If it ain't broke, stop trying to break it! - CS

Survival of the fittest or survival of talent | footblogball

Fantastic article.

https://footblogball.wordpress.com/2015/02/27/survival-of-the-fittest-or-survival-of-talent/

Survival of the fittest or survival of talent

The optical illusion that is early talent identification and the selection philosophy of district teams

According to Darwin's theory of evolution organisms which are better adapted to their environment tend to survive longer. Does the environment we create influence the selection process and favor those that possess attributes that give them a temporary advantage while at the same time disqualifying those who at that moment in time are struggling to adapt?  Adaptive behavior is key to the survival of the human race and specific to soccer, a trait of high quality players. However if the early environment supports only temporary adapting systems ( in this case the young player) then those that are better equipt to adapt in the long run may well be lost to us forever.

Are some systems and structures just counterproductive ideologies that that are in conflict with development (learning & biopsychosocial) and the young player's natural learning process? We should of course remember that struggle is also part of the learning process. What are we doing to help players overcome those struggles that will appear during their development (non-linear)?

The Standard Model of Talent Identification
( Bailey, R.P: & Collins, D. The Standard Model of Talent Development and its

Discontents, Kinesiology Review, 2, 248-259)

In a recent paper, Bailey and Collins introduce one of the most common models used in talent identification, the Standard Model of Talent Development (SMTD)

This is a pyramid structure that is based on erroneous presumptions.

1. Development and performance are essentially linear.
2. Early ability that is identified as talent indicates future ability and performance.

The selection process is done at the cost of the wider group where focus is placed on those who have been identified as talented ( Bailey, R.P: & Collins, D. The Standard Model of Talent Development and its Discontents, Kinesiology Review, 2, 248-259)

Selection: Based on current performance. Identify those as talented as early as possible.

Early specialization is deemed necessary to reach elite performance level in the future.

Early performance and ability is necessary for success in the future.

De-selection: Hard to return to the system. Questionable selection criteria (often based on early physical characteristics)

District team selection often begins at the age of 13/14 and is part of this pyramid. Its influence is felt years before the actual selection process. I recently spoke with a Swedish U17 youth international who said that this process can create and feed a stressful environment. Over a year before the district team selection, every day at school, at training, on social media each match or training performance was put under the microscope of analysis. "How did you play? How did I play?  As well as being physically tired you would be mentally tired as well". The player went on to say "I was lucky because I had an external support structure, family and good adult mentors that really helped me, I don't know how I would have coped otherwise". Competition, failure and struggle are of course part of the sporting experience. They don't have to be negative experiences for children. The problems occur when it is all based on adult demands and values. These adult demands and values are appearing earlier and earlier in our sporting structures. The adult and the child, do they have the same motives?

There is no convincing evidence that most sports require an early investment of training in one activity. In fact, what evidence is available suggests that across a number of eventual elite players, early specialization is negatively correlated with eventual success (Gullich, 2011).

In the paper In the paper The Standard Model of Talent Development and Its Discontents (Bailey, R.P; & Collins, D. ) It is suggested that  "the apparent success of the SMTD is ultimately an optical illusion as there is no way of knowing who might have succeeded through different systems, and who were de-selected from the system but might have (under different circumstances) gone on to achieve high performance".

The paper goes on to suggest risks associated with ill-focused of incorrectly administered pyramids.

1. Early adult like training can lead to over-use injuries. There is a particular high risk associated with intensive training during maturation.
2. Early intensive training can lead to psychological problems. This can lead to drop out and burnout

Development is non-linear, learning is non-linear. Therefore talent is non-linear
Judging early performance during the formative years does have its problems. This is true especially when judging and identifying something that is non-linear using what is essentially a linear model.

1. Miss out on identifying other factors that are associated with talent ( soft skills such as decision making, communication, awareness)
2. Often fails to recognize potential due to a focus on the performance now.
3. Many pyramid structures based on early talent identification discriminate against those born later in the sporting calendar year.
4. Size and strength factors that are identified early contribute to a temporary advantage resulting in short term superior performance. This all evens out after maturity. There is a risk that the player has been used for his temporary advantage (to win) and has not actually learned the game. This player will struggle when growth evens out when maturity is attained.
5. Questionable accuracy with regard to measurement of ability, often affected by gender, ethnicity or socioeconomic background.

Are we judging biological maturation or talent?

Dutch Soccer coach Raymond Verheijen has presented data under the title "Growth spurt study in Dutch Youth Academy soccer". A 12 year study that included 36 professional clubs was carried out in Holland between the years 1997-2009. An analysis of a data base of over 10,000 players was carried out where factors such as height, weight, injuries and date of birth were taken in to consideration. The general idea was that month of birth should have no influence on talent. At the beginning of the study the Dutch schoolboy national teams were selected from August to July. Most players were born in the period August to October (43%) while only 10% of the players were born May-July. This phenomenon is often referred to as the Relative Age Effect (RAE).

Relative age effect (RAE): A bias that seems to favor a higher participation rate amongst those that are born early in the selection period).

Hancock, Adler, & Cote in a study from 2013 suggested that RAE is more than just a physical advantage. The research suggested that there are also some powerful social influences at play.

1. Parents (Matthew effect) – The rich get richer. Those who are perceived to have ability are given preferential treatment and extra support. This in turn increases that ability which leads to more support.
2. Coach (Pygmalion effect) – The higher the expectation placed on people the better is their performance. Those who are perceived to have ability are given more attention. Others feel neglected.
3. Athletes (Galatea effect) – A player may see that she is able to perform better than her peers. This performance can be due to due to early maturation A players opinion about her ability and his self-expectations about her performance largely determine the performance.

During this study the Dutch FA changed the cut-off date for its national youth teams to the Jan-Dec period. The RAE adjusted accordingly. It seemed that the scouting system was primarily based on how old the player was as opposed to how talented that player is or could be. Countries with small populations have a relatively small player pool.

Focusing on winning during the early stages of development just encourages the RAE, in turn making the player pool even smaller. It becomes more about the survival of the fittest as opposed to survival of talent.

The various traits slowly appear and differentiate over time….. infancy, adolescence, and even adulthood will see the latent components undergoing various transformations (Simonton,1999,p442)

In the research paper "Swedish soccer is searching for talent but finding age" Tomas Peterson says why players are chosen in accordance with their physical development is not known "but one may assume that there is a silent agenda dictating that these players will be the most successful in the forthcoming selection steps" from club to district team to national youth team. The material and data collected "indicates that selection on the grounds of physical development is already at work in groups of 5-12 year olds and " and the effect of this process is very clear when these children reach 13 and enter an even harder selection process. It is Tomas Petersons opinion that this is counter- productive to the development "of all the football talent that exists within every yearly cohort of girls and boys. I also believe that its goes against the goals of both the sports movement and the community in general".

Summary
"Assessment of talent at a single or narrow point in time is a flawed approach"- Mark Upton

Many current methods of focusing on early indicators of talent are very static and linear approaches. They ignore the fact that development is individual and that differences in performance can be explained by differences in maturation. Coaches that judge early talent evaluate and focus on the contemporary level of performance where physical characteristics are fundamental factors in the talent identification process. This brings to the surface three fundamental problems that need to be addressed with early talent ID.

1. Coaches gamble on the wrong players- (misuse of resources)
2. Miss out on those with more long term potential
3. Environment problem (development of a non-inclusive environment. No clear pathway back in to the system)

If we want to keep players viable over what is essentially a long, complex and sensitive development process then the aim should be to keep as many as possible as long as possible active within our sporting organization. What are we doing to help certain players overcome struggles that will appear during their development (non-linear)? What role does the environment play in creating these struggles?  We should remember that failure and struggle is also part of the learning process. Our environment should be a place where these failures and struggles can be met head on and dealt with through patience, encouragement, understanding and support.

Does the environment we create influence the selection process and favor those that possess attributes that give them a temporary advantage while at the same time disqualifying those who at that moment in time are struggling to adapt?

Sent from my iPhone

Cespedes Family BBQ on Twitter: "Always key to draft guys who can play"

CespedesBBQ: "Always key to draft guys who can play http://t.co/Sb7dJuPcPE"

 Found via Team Stream by Bleacher Report.

This is an early front-runner for tweet of the year, IMO. Simple, no-nonsense and a lot of common-sense. This is/should be the sixth tool. "Can he play?" We know there are quite a few so-called five-tool guys who fail to make it? Well, how can someone who has all the tool not make it? Because he can't play.

Remember this play?

1974 WS Gm2: Marshall picks off Washington in ninth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWb80Qz75bk

Herb Washington was going to create a new position in baseball to rival the DH. He was going to be the designated runner (DR). Charlie Finley, the A's owner was a maverick. Always thinking outside the box. Here, he out-thunk himself by not asking this simple question, "Can he play?"

from yourememberthat.com
http://www.yourememberthat.com/media/17684/Herb_Washington_Pickoff_-_1974_WS/#.VXbiX89Viko

In 1974 Oakland Athletics' owner Charlie Finley signed 22-year-old Herb Washington to an MBL contract. Washington's baseball experience was minimal, but he did hold the indoor world record in the 50-yard dash. Throughout the 1974 season, Washington never once batted or played a defensive position. His sole task was to pinch-run. He stole 29 bases in 45 attempts--which is not really a good success rate for a fast MLB baserunner. In Game #2 of the 1974 World Series, Washington was brought in to pinch-run for Joe Rudi in the top of the ninth inning with one out and the A's trailing the L.A. Dodgers 3-2. To the delight of baseball traditionalists who viewed Washington as an unqualified interloper, Mike Marshall decisively picked off Washington in front of a huge NBC television audience. Curt Gowdy and Vin Scully call the play. Washington's out effectively squelched an A's rally. (They had scored twice in the top of the ninth to make the game close.) The Dodgers won the game 3-2. Washington was cut by the A's in May 1975 and never played baseball again.

It's such a great question that needs to asked a lot throughout baseball. I use a derivative of the question a lot as an answer to questions I hear from around the ball field.

It is that great a question, it is so versatile, that it can serve as the answer to other questions.

Here are some examples:

• Q: Should I buy my son/daughter that new, expensive bat to help him/her make the team?
• A: It helps if he/she can play. 

See you have to change the order of the words around a little bit, but it works!!

• Q: Should I take my son/daughter for private lessons or that Olympic athlete workout facility to elevate his game?
• A: Umm....it helps if he/she can play.

Q: Cool......is this question/answer transferable to other areas of my life? Is this like a magic question or something? 

A: I'm picking up on your sarcasm there, Champ. But yes it is transferable. Listen up!!!

(Editor's Note: Best Q&A/sentence in blogging history. Why? Best comedy scenes of all time)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mSd5t2n3ck Tommy Boy - Picking up on you sarcasm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZkbtP-t_D8 My Cousin Vinny - Were these magic grits? 

• Q: My Boss doesn't respect me at work, should I take some college courses to improve my job skills?
• A: It helps if you can play.

• Q: My wife is thinking of leaving me, should I consider counseling to help save our marriage?
• A: It helps if you can play. 

I'm thinking of using this as an answer to every difficult life question thrown my way for the next thirty days, I think it's that good. 

Remember, boys and girls.....It helps if you can play!!