013 Rate of force development

with my co-host Robynar Sery, and we're going to talk about rate of forced development and the

“concept of explosiveness today. So essentially, rate of forced development is often referred to”

any explosiveness as well. They're often referred to as qualities that athletes need in order to be competitive, but they're rarely defined very, you know, very accurately. A rate of forced development sometimes is given a definition, but explosiveness generally is not, and that does lead confusion. So what we're going to do, I'm just going to chat through very quickly the physiology of rate of forced development and try and get into this idea of what explosiveness actually is,

and then we'll talk a little bit about training programs that will improve those qualities, although I'm going to be a little bit, I'm going to be a little bit sort of upfront now and say that, essentially, I don't really need to target them directly the way that most people think you do, and the same way that you don't really need to target power in the way that most people think you do.

“So essentially, when we say rate of forced development, what we're saying is the rate at which”

forced increases during a maximal effort contraction. So essentially, if you have a high rate of forced development, you get up to a high rate of forced quicker than somebody who doesn't have that same ability. So ultimately, that sounds like a very good thing, and it sounds like it will contribute

to athletic performance, and indeed it does. So what's the problem? Well, the problem is that when

you look at the underlying adaptions, because obviously rate to forced development itself is not an adaption that you can obtain, it's an outcome that we can measure you increasing in. So the same way that strength is not an adaption strength is an outcome that you increase, and the adaptions underpin that, similarly, when you look at rate to forced development, it must have underlying adaptions. Now, essentially, when you go and look at those underlying adaptions, what you discover

is that for the very early part of the contractions, say the first, you know, maybe 50 milliseconds, ultimately, that is pretty much determined by the same adaptions that determine maximum speed. And once you get past that early kind of 50 milliseconds, also, you start to blend essentially the adaptions that govern maximum strength and the adaptions that govern speed. So essentially, there isn't anything unique to rate to forced development that we can't get from training for

either speed or strength in our normal training programs that we're already doing. Now, just to be clear, what generally, you know, kind of has been found in context of that early sort of

first 50 milliseconds is that it's pretty much rate coding or no tune at five frequency. That's the

“important factor for rate to forced development. After that, it's basically pretty much everything”

that governs both the speed and the strength kind of adaptions. So essentially, the reason why rate to forced development on the one hand is, you know, kind of very useful is that, of course, it does allow us to achieve a high rate of force, sorry, a high level of force relatively quickly. But of course, it doesn't really have anything unique behind it in terms of adaptions. So if you say to yourself, okay, I'd like to train to increase rate to forced development, then basically

you could just train to increase speed and strength and you would get an increase in rate to forced development. There isn't a way of avoiding that or preventing that from happening because the same adaptions are underpinning all of those qualities. Now, that's essentially rate to forced

development relatively quick explanation in terms of explosiveness. Ultimately, the problem here is

we don't have a good definition. So either you can say, well, I just meant rate to forced development, in which case you could say, well, why are we using the word explosiveness, then if you have already got a perfectly serviceable terminology that you can use, you know, that actually does have a definition. But ultimately, if you mean something different, then okay, maybe it means, you know, sort of something more like power or, you know, speed or strength or whatever,

well, we already have good definitions for all of those things. And ultimately, you know, essentially strength and speed both have their own unique adaptions, beneath them, and power is something that, you know, is just a combination of strength and speed. And so again, it is subservient to those two. So again, you kind of back to the square one, which is to say that the only really kind of major qualities that we have to focus on are simply strength and speed. Now, of course,

all of that is going to be, you know, kind of dependent on the specific movement that we're doing, there are other biomechanic factors like, before we jump to the podcast, there were just chatting through how the proximal to distal sequence can be really interesting in this particular context. But ultimately, where we get to all of this is that essentially, if a program is already

maximum speed gains, there is actually no need to consider rate of force development or the

“concept of explosiveness separately. They're automatically going to be covered by the programs”

that are designed to improve these two major qualities. So that's basically the physiological

introduction, very short one this week. There's not really very much to say, Rob, over to you. We were talking before this podcast about programs that you're writing programs that you're, you know, kind of developing for use with your athletes and how they improve maximum strength and speed. As just as a way to introduce this topic and for people who maybe haven't caught all of our podcasts before, can you just give us a brief explanation of how you're writing programs that

allow you to simultaneously increase maximum strength and maximum speed at the same time, you know, for long periods of time throughout a training year, for example.

Yeah, for sure, Chris. So I mean, like Chris said, there's not going to be as much to say on this one.

“What I'm designing a program that someone, you know, my typically thinking, you know,”

is an aim to improve rate of force development like Chris said, I'm just improving strength or speed. So will you take the example of a combat sports athlete, you've talked about those quite a bit, and then you use the the proximal to distal sequencing there, which Chris and I mentioned plenty of times down the podcast, more proximal muscles need higher force production capabilities, more distal segments are going to wind up meeting more towards the maximum speed and of things.

So if you're looking at maybe what someone would say a typical program would be for a fighter to improve

rate of force development, a lot of times you're going to see things like Olympic lifting variants,

power cleans, power snatchers, polls, things like that, and I don't typically program any of those for my athletes, I like them myself, I love Olympic lifting, they're great, you know, exercises, if your goal is Olympic lifting, do you need someone who needs to be more

“explosive and have, you know, more overall power, you know, for a fighter, you need to have”

exercises that are a lot more specific with the proximal muscles, for example, if you take hip thrust even in RDL, things like that, the force production there is going to be way higher than it will be in like a power cleaner, something like that, power cleaner working with a lower load and kind of a mid speed, it's not super fast either, so it's not really going to improve strength to a really relevant degree and it's not really going to improve speed much, so in my opinion,

I would use something like a hip thrust, focus on strength, low reps, few sets, and then, you know, gaped there for the hip, and then if I'm thinking of, you know, step four, the ankle, step four, the upper limbs and that, again, a power clean and exercise that people typically think of for RD, isn't really giving me anything interesting there in terms of maximum speed, so I'd much rather use jumps, light throws, things like that to improve the speed end of things

so that, you know, I'm not just kind of sitting in the middle and getting good at a specific exercise when I don't even need that exercise in my program and I get a little bit of lift, maybe fun, we only need them if you're going to compete in the Olympics, people will probably get mad at that and you know, I say I don't use them, but kind of, let's kind of just, let's kind of just, let's add the physiological perspective there to fill, to fill in some of those details,

so yeah, it absolutely right, the interesting thing is that people look at the output of those exercises like the Olympic weightlifting activities, they look at the output and they go, the power output is enormous, it's way higher than you're going to see in any other exercise, so they look at the rate of force development and they go, wow, this rate to force development is really, really high, you know, this is really interesting, this exercise must stimulate

really big gains in power and in rate to force development and the, the trap that they fall into is mistaken the outcome for the adoption, they've gone because the outcome is high, it must stimulate gains in the outcome and that's not how the body works, what is an interesting outcome, if you look at a standard sort of force velocity chart, you'll notice the smack bang in the middle, there is a maximum point for power output, that's because when you multiply force by velocity,

you get power, so by definition, the value in the middle of those two is going to, you know, kind of middle, approximately middle of force middle of velocity, it's going to give you maximum power outputs, that as we explained in our power episode is terrible for increasing either strength

away from the speed and as you can be, far away from the strength and as you can be, you're not really going to kind of, at the same time as being far away from the speed, end obviously, so you kind of, not really very good at improving anything that is under pin by its own specific actions, power is under pin by the force time velocity, so it's basically you can't get an improvement in power without increasing strength or speed,

you can't get an improvement in rates of rate to force development without increasing either strength or speed either, so ultimately when people are getting confused about these Olympic weightlifting derivatives and they're going, oh well, no, you know, they're amazing, because look at how high the power outputs are, look at how high they're rate to force development is, they're mistaken because they're confusing outcomes with adaptions, and so you're

not programming those, so as you've said, you're programming some heavy strength training for the hip because you're focusing on the proximal to digital sequence. How does the rest of the kind of program fit around that? I mean, are you, are you doing high velocity stuff before that?

Yeah, typical, you know, typical program set up that we've always mentioned,

so starting with the high velocity end of things, moving into the heavy strength stuff, won't repeat it over and over, but you know, hip thrust, audio, whatever you might choose in this scenario, we've covered like the heavy rotational work for the core. Again, everybody thinks because,

“you know, upon JK, it's not as moving fairly fast, you need to train only fast, but”

certainly not the case there, so that heavy core work is going to be great, and then just following that up, standard strength, hypertrophy stuff, and again, you know, like, for an athlete, without talking like anything, hyperspecific just in the normal basics, presses, pull downs, really, for whatever muscles you think are important for the athlete, and, you know, for most people, it's going to be just most of the major ones, it's not anything super fancy

that's being done, and like we just said for like RFD specifically, there's really nothing fancy, it's really the same basic program set up, same basic weekly, you know, frequency two times a week, maybe three, if you don't have much else going on, and then, you know, normal keeping a few reps, I value, and all those things, mode, and maybe moderate reps, not going crazy with anything for, you know, high reps and high volumes, and yeah, I just, I mean, I had a, I did have a chat with

the Arizona, and he was asking me about the Olympic lifts, and if I did them myself, and years ago I did, and I don't currently, but I do like them, and he asked my opinion on them, actually, for, you know, improving power in that, and then, for that purpose, I didn't,

“I think they didn't really much of anything, and he said, well, why is it called a power clean?”

Well, I don't know, man. And all the things I wanted to figure out for there, all the things I wanted to figure out for moving, during a while, just, I'm not bad as a funny comment, but... No, it's, it's, it's fascinating, I mean, it probably tells us more about human psychology than it tells us about anything else, really, but... Yeah, not much about training. Yeah, give something a name

that sounds like it does something important, and then, you know, some people at least will believe that it does. So, yeah, but yes, essentially, where we're kind of just describing here, one of the classic programs that we've described previously, you know, built around heavy strength

training, with the high velocity stuff done before it, because of course, we do that first, because

there's, you know, we want to avoid any fatigue from anything else before we do that, high velocity stuff, because high velocity work is very negatively affected by fatigue.

“And actually, this is a useful opportunity just to reiterate an important point, which is that”

the effects of fatigue mechanisms, pretty much all fatigue mechanisms will tend to produce a reduction in movement velocity. Some of them also increase, sorry, some of them also decrease muscle fiber force, but pretty much all fatigue mechanisms will have a negative effect on muscle fiber shortening velocity and on movement velocity as a whole. Rate coding, motinit firing frequency, which is essentially one of the major adaptions under pin speed

gains, and has been linked to the rate to force development, especially in the early phase of rate to force development, is very, very linked, very closely linked to movement speed, especially muscle fiber shortening velocity. So, if we see movement velocities reduce, that will imply that we've reduced rate coding. As a result, we are unlikely to be stimulating and increase in rate coding, because the thing that stimulates increases in rate coding is almost

certainly hitting high levels of rate coding in the exercise that we're doing. So, ultimately,

any kind of tea present is going to stop us from triggering that adaption. So, this is a really, really important point, because if people are programming in ways where they're trying to increase rate to force development, whether they're calling that rate to force development or whether they're calling it explosiveness doesn't really matter, they are going to want to make sure that the

So, this is one of the reasons why hyperlosty stuff at the beginning of a workout is so effective for that particular adaption is because we're coming in completely fresh, hopefully, if our training week is a bit plund appropriately, and that's a separate conversation. But, you know, hopefully, the athlete is arriving in the fresh state and they're able to go through a basic warm-up and then start doing some hyperlosty jumps, throws, that kind of thing. And that should

be the time in which our rate to force development and our speed gains are being achieved by means of multiple adaptions, but in the case of rate to force development does a say, definitely getting some increases in rate coding, they're not so far away. Sorry, they're not too far in frequencies. So, yeah, really important point in that fatigue is very, very negative for those adaptions back in the

“home. I think it's, this is what it's important to be operating for more of like an adaption's”

based model versus, you know, methods and all these things, you know, people love these like

all kinds of fancy programs and we've said it a million times, they love the novelty and all that.

You just look at my adaptions. I know it's going to cause them, if I then know what is going to mess them up, just don't do that. And next thing is, it doesn't think it's, it makes programs too simple and then people friend that, you know, no one's going to know it's going to buy into this. It's too easy, it can't be this, I've had people tell me it can't be this simple. When I write them a program and I'd give it, you know, X number of weeks and one minute I feel,

and then when they jump higher they run faster, and one of my volleyball girls who's a place semi-prow, she's jumping like inches higher than she ever was, she's so much better than all these girls in the quarter-doh train and I'm like, I told you, I just, and it looks hilarious, it's simple on paper, but that is all you need, just don't, you know, overthink it.

“I think there's two, there's two sides to isn't it? There's the, the side that you've mentioned”

which is that people expect and dissipate something more complicated. And then the other side of it is that they expect and anticipate a lot more volume and a lot more work. And when it comes to speed, especially, and, and applying to all of these concepts that we're talking about today, whether it's rate to force development, exposure to speed, power, any of this stuff. All of these things are going to be very negatively affected by fatigue, not just within session, but also from previous sessions.

And that requires not just a conversation about the strength training program, but also about any conditioning that's being done and also about any sports practice that's being done.

And the reality is, um, it may be the case that the sports coaches, um, may not appreciate

that they need to have the same conversation with you or us, because the same thing applies to the skill. So if we're trying to, if a, if a sports coach is trying to improve a skill, they are going to want to make sure that they don't have any residual fatigue at the start of that session, because, um, skill development also requires, um, I actually had some questions about this in my last Instagram, um, Q&A. People are asking, well, what is the best approach for motor learning? What's the

best approach for learning a skill? If I'm trying to enhance my ability to do these athletic activities, watch them, or treat them like speed training. Yeah. So avoid fatigue is the first thing that you would do. Now, there's a, a few other things you can do. You can look at external focuses of attention, you know, in addition to, you know, the classic kind of coaching approaches that probably skills, uh, coaches are already doing, but, you know, they can look at, um, external folks

attention, they can look at avoiding fatigue. So the reality is that even though, you may sometimes

feel like you're talking to a brick wall when you're trying to persuade the sports coach to do less, because it's interfering with your ability to improve speed, the reality is they should be having the same conversation with you to try and do less so that they can improve skill, because, um, the idea that we can just kind of throw tons and tons of volume at the athletes and, um, that they can recover from anything and that they can make improvements in any quality while being in

that fatigue state is nonsense. They can't, um, the reality is we know that you can't learn

“mode skills in a fatigue state and you can't improve speed in a fatigue state. So, I think this”

really important point, because, uh, your, your comment there was totally true where you said, like, people want more complex programs, but I think they also want more work. They do. They want to feel that they've been worked today. Yeah, they do. I mean, they had you have been proving under fatigue in a while. You're now doing that. You can't do that on these qualities. Yeah, you can't do that on these qualities. It's like it's just, uh, and let me just clarify exactly

why that is. So, uh, a lot of people go, well, you know, I can gain muscle mass when I'm really fatigue. So, why can't I gain, you know, kind of an increase in rate coding when I'm, you know, fatigue state? Well, this is why if you look at the way high-perature works, if you activate the

a whole range of possible motor units to run after and actually create adaptions in. And if you

get some CNF degree, you get some muscle damage in the top, motor units of that pool, then, okay, you're going to lose some possible gains there, and that's a problem. But you're still going to get some stimulus to lower down the motor unit pool, and as long as you're not really at mass bodyability, you're probably going to see some kind of movement forward on that front. So, it's not the end of the world if you're training in a fatigue state. I mean, it can be if you

kind of really dig yourself into a really big fatigue hole, but, you know, it's not the end of the world if you kind of slightly over the edge of being, you know, accumulating fatigue of time. The problem with neural adaptions is that you kind of need to hit your max level of whatever the quality, whatever the kind of thing is that you're trying to improve. So, if you're trying to improve a motor unit, you can't need to hit your current maximum level of recruitment. If you just keep

like 95% it probably doesn't do anything or it doesn't stimulate the adaption. Same thing with the rate coding. So, like if you're not hitting your maximum level of rate coding, what's the incentive for the brain to actually upgrade you to a high level of rate coding? There isn't really one. So, it's neural adaptions and same with skill. If you're practicing a movement and the brain has a really solid motor program for a throw, and you kind of then practice a slightly

“worse one because you're slightly tired, then the brain is going to go, "Why are we doing this?”

I'm just going to go back to the one that you learned last week or established last week and use that instead." So, your current throw accession isn't doing, I think, for your actual mechanics improvements. Even if your coach is trying to help you improve them, it's probably not changing anything because your brain is just going to refer back to the better one that it had last week. Whereas if you can get that throw practice in a non-fatate date and get the

coaching and get the external focus in your mind and everything's putting together, now you've got a chance to actually increase your coordination and getting better mechanics. So, this is really really important. This binary idea of either, I get the adaption or I don't, is very, very prevalent in the neural side of things. Whereas not so much in the peripheral side of things, you can kind of get some benefits even when you're in a very fatigue state. I think that's

one of those situations where the sports coach, having the strength and conditioning coach, probably need to be having a conversation where they're both trying to get each other to do less.

“Whereas the moment I don't think that's what's going on.”

You know, I was done though, the skill thing was funny because I take it back to like just years and years ago when I was sponsored skateboarding, like if I wanted to learn a new trick, I wasn't going to start trying a new trick. When I was hours into a day of skating and my legs were jelly-like, then I would just think about that. That would make absolutely no sense. You're going to try to begin in the day when you feel good. And I would think of people just

sat for a second and bought on that. If you want to learn anything at all, you're going to do it when you feel terrible and everything feels awful. No, it just makes absolutely no sense. In a new year of guys like field athletes, all that stuff, we're doing it all the time. And if you really just sat there for a second, you probably come to the conclusion pretty quick. I think it's confused because

so I've been thinking about this motor learning question and I've been thinking that there's probably, and this is me just kind of putting this out there. So, you know, this is what goes on inside my head when people aren't looking. So, I've been thinking about how,

if you're training, if you're coaching a complete beginner to do an exercise that they've never

done before, the chances are that you are going to have to give them some internal focus of attention cues. Now, I'm sure there are people out there who can, you know, not do that, but generally speaking, say for example, you've got, when I say internal focus attention, I'm being in the strict sense of the word. I'm not saying my muscle connection, which is a subset of the internal focus. So, my muscle connection is like when you're squeezing

the muscle, internal focus is where you're literally just thinking about a part of your body moving. So, the very earliest stages of learning a movement, you might say to a, someone who's learned to bench press, you know, I want you to tuck your elbows a little bit more. That's an internal focus of attention because you are thinking about a part of your body. You know, an external focus attention will be to aim the bar towards a particular point in space.

So, ultimately, we've got this kind of very early stage where internal focus attention,

where you're literally just moving a part of your body in a particular way. I think that, if somebody is at that stage of a learning process on a movement, that simple, because obviously, you know, skateboarding that you're describing, then moves are not simple.

“You need to get up again. You know, what I'm talking about here is where somebody is”

literally talking about a simple freeway text size, like a bench press while they'll score, which have complexity to them, but require a, like, at least a sort of process of, you know,

is learnable with some degrees of fatigue. I would think, I mean, and I'm certainly coached clients in just regular strength training exercises with those kinds of cues, you know,

later on in a session, if I'm done something that I did more important first,

you know, even when getting them pop clients, you're trying to grow muscle over,

“may want to learn to squat. And I think you and Jake actually talk about it a little bit.”

And I definitely placed those later in a session, and they still get better, you know, but like you said, maybe it doesn't internal cues initially, not impacted so much. Yeah, I think that is probably where the internal focus attention and the movement of the, it's a very kind of, you know, large scale motor pattern, and it's not, you know, hugely dependent on a very fine degree of motor control or a very high degree of accuracy. But I don't think

the same will be true about say shooting free throws, for example. Yeah, or, you know, throwing something out or anything really. The complexity there is just too great to and the movement is too quick to really start to see improvements. This is me just thinking aloud about how there is that does seem to be some room for maneuver in that motor learning process in certain very, very basic tasks. But I would expect that once you got the athlete to the point where they were

doing the movement, the squat or the bench press or the deadlift, and it looked pretty much correct as far as you could tell. And they were now in the process where they needed an external focus of attention and they were making improvements in coordination on that basis. I would expect now that if they got to teach you wouldn't see any coordination improvements. So what I'm arguing for, not arguing for, because I still don't feel very, you know, convinced by this as a model. I'm just

putting this out there. I just have this kind of idea in my mind that maybe there are kind of two sort of scenarios in motor learning where by maybe there's a kind of gross motor pattern that can be learned with a bit more room for maneuver, a regular room if you like on the fatigue front. And then there's that refined level of coordination where the athlete is gradually iterating and improving and iterating and improving. Hopefully based on their own external focus of attention

to make the movement better and that's where fatigue is going to stop us from making those improvements.

“Is this making sense? Yeah, I think, you know, I mean, thinking about all I guess that in terms of”

cues I use and things like that, um, within a session and ways I've structured them, it would make, to me, perfect sense. It's just, it's just, I'm, I'm not necessarily saying that the internal and the external focus of attention on necessary here in this context. I'm just trying to use them as a marker to say, if someone's, if someone's in the zone where an internal focus is getting you to make progress, I suspect that they're probably capable of making progress,

you know, even if they're fatigue. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If an internal focus would be useless to you because they've already weighed past that point in the beginning next time. Yeah. Then I think probably that's the scenario where you wouldn't make gains in coordination if you were, um, you know, in a fatigue state. It just feels to me like an interesting marker to designate these two zones,

because I think, yeah, there's going to be these people who who've never done a particular simple

movement like a squad to a bench press. Not that simple, but, you know, in terms of,

“I think activities, it's simple enough. Um, probably do make some progress, um, when we give them”

an internal focus and as a result, they probably are improving with a fatigue state in terms of their coordination. So I'm not saying that we can never, ever, ever improve, um, a coordination pattern in a fatigue state, but as far as athletes are concerned, it might as well be true because ultimately, you know, we're never going to be in a scenario where those, uh, kind of, um, individuals are, you know, being, uh, sort of, um, you know, expected to make serious improvements in their athletic

ability by using a turn-off axis of attention, or, you know, sort of, probably get a different

pile like you did, because otherwise people will say that we said that you just never improve if you're

even a little bit fatigued, and it's, in place, well, which is not, well, sort of, there's a different thing is, the thing is, the thing is, in motor learning research, if you get someone to do throws for accuracy, um, then it does apply. You, you can't make the improvement in coordination if you're in a fatigue state. So if you've got a, if you're throwing something for accuracy, you know, a member of the study. Yes, an amazing study. It's an amazing study. Yeah, it's growing,

well, like a handball into a, it's a counter target. That kind of thing. And so ultimately, if you prefer to dig the arm before you do that, uh, practice session, the next time you come back, you're actually worse than you would have been if you'd not done that practice session. So it's like, for, for slightly more complex things where you've got a speed involved, a speed, uh,

total beginner. I'm just trying to create a model like live here, as I'm trying to just kind

of get my head around it, that I do think there are certain very specific beginner-related scenarios where someone doing a slower movement that is a little bit simpler potentially will see an improvement in coordination. Um, that is, to me, very, very fascinating. Um, so yeah, um, how you would test the quality of that move. The thing is, though, with throwing the accuracy thing, you can test by the accuracy. Yeah, how many, how many objects do you get into the kind of the hoop, um,

whereas testing the accuracy of say a bench press or something is very much more difficult. It's like, well, what am I measuring? You know, what precisely am I measuring here? Um, that's not something

that motor learning is very good at doing. Um, so when I say motor learning is not very good at

using the motor learning research or kind of, uh, you know, sort of community potentially is not not as good at doing that. We don't have the measurement tools. So yeah, um, so where was I? Yes, so the reason we introduced this was because we were saying that the sports coach and the strength coach potentially should be, you know, both, you know, kind of, uh, negotiating with each other to try and bring the athletes, uh, kind of overall, um, work load down a little bit, or at least

“modify it so that it isn't, um, creating the postwork app key, uh, that they interfere with each other's”

skilled development sessions or speed development sessions. So what cool? Um, my afternoon, I'll get in. Yeah, so we went off, off piece a little bit there, but do you have any, um, any programs that you've seen recently? I mean, you mentioned, of course, the Olympic way lifting. I mean, that was a big element of the programs that you are criticizing earlier, but do you have any other, um, programs that you wanted to note that you've seen, uh, that you think are unhelpful for

developing, you know, speed, exposiveness or FD, anything like that? Yeah, I mean, I don't want to mention before we, we have down here was, uh, the idea of, uh, it was specifically for, you know, combat sports athletes using a snatch group deadlift, as the movement that's going to improve, like, the maximum strength of things for power of the hit and stuff like that. Um, I'm just in general, you know, I love deadlifts and I love snatch group deadlifts and

“nothing wrong with them. I think you can probably do a lot better movements from those athletes.”

I mean, there's going to be ones we're using a lot more low, like a hip thrust first of all,

and there are a lot less fatiguing, like if you take something like a snatch group deadlift like that, um, it's going to be very, very taxing. I mean, there's a lot going on there. You're hitting a much larger range. This is a, this is a snatch group from the floor. Yeah, on the floor. Oh, wow. Yeah, not something. Wow. Wow. Wow. You're using much, um, you know, if you didn't with an RDL or something, it's certainly not quite as bad, but you're pulling all the way from the

floor like that. I don't really see the application there for you know, like I said in this instance, it was a combat sports athlete. I'm much rather you, something that isn't going to leave them toast for, you know, the, the skills session, the training session and the week. Exactly. As a whole. Exactly. Um, things like that. I mean, you know, and again, I give us the idea that somehow that movement is improving power of the hip and it's just not going to efficiently do that.

And even in that case, or you know, it's more of a, it's more of a kind of all round kind of exercises, isn't it? It really doesn't do any one thing really well. Yeah. There's a whole bunch of things in a media. Okay. Well, you ever have like a very limited equipment, maybe, and I was like training in my home gym, and I wanted some kind of exercises just to do. I personally might do

“it because I like them. Honestly, honestly, I would start looking at combinations of things like”

audio, not audio. So I actually prefer, um, I just prefer stiff leg deadlifts. Um, but you can kind of start to think about well, maybe I program some rake balls for various applications, maybe some stiff legs, you know, and again, it's like you're looking at limited equipment. There's a different conversation there, but this is actually starting to sound like we could do another episode next week on transfer of specific exercises to watching applications. I think that would be really

cool for a lot to this to this episode. Yeah. Let's do that. Cool. So let's stop here for today. Um, thanks everyone for listening to us again, even though we did go off piece the number of times. Hopefully that was useful. Uh, we will be back next week with a discussion of transfer of exercises to, um, uh, yes, sporting applications, probably focusing on combat sports if, uh, Rob has everything