starting strength gym
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Strength Training for female high school athletes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    74

    Default Strength Training for female high school athletes

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Coaches.....I could use some help.

    I am in charge of creating an 8 week pre-season conditioning program for a local girls high school soccer team. This is my 3rd year implementing the program. This winter, I was able to convince the owners of the facility to purchase racks, barbells, and bumper plates to incorporate strength training this year. In the past, I only had dumbbells up to 40lbs available. Lame.

    My intention is to integrate squats, DL, press, and bench press into the program this summer, following the SS 3x5 linear progression model. Not one of these girls has strength trained in the past, so they will benefit greatly.

    Here is where I need the help. The owner is a PT. Her strength training experience is minimal. She is sure the appropriate way to strength train female high school athletes is with body weight exercises and lower loads (15-20 reps, not RM) because it's "safer". I will not be able to convince her unless I can come up with documented research on the topic.

    Do any of you have knowledge of a study addressing the effectiveness/safety of training 14-18 yr females for maximum strength gains utilizing a high load/low rep template?

    I found an NSCA position paper advocating a load of 75% of 1RM using 10-15 reps for novice youth. I feel this is more conservative than needed but it is the only researched backed position I have been able to locate so far.

    Expert opinion (I quoted SS content when discussing this topic), personal experience on my part, and common sense won't cut it with her. She needs research.

    Any help or opinions would be greatly appreciated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10,378

    Default

    Demonstrating that something is safe is a very difficult thing. Demonstrating that something is frequently injurious is easier. I think you will be hard pressed to find the research she wants to see. However, since she likes data, ask her for some. Perhaps she could look up the occurrence of injuries playing soccer. The data for women athletes and their knees in soccer should be available and, as I remember, it was not particularly good. You should point her to the relevant sections of Starting Strength where training kids is specifically addressed. You should also ask her for a reasoned analysis based on biomechanics and physiology for why weight training is okay for high school males playing football, but not females. Good luck with this.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7,856

    Default

    The issue, as has been discussed on the board before, is that there just isn't much, if any, research - at least good research - on the kind of strength training SS describes and advocates. Jordan, Sully, or someone else may know of some, but I don't. We're operating with hundreds of thousands of hours of careful observation, anecdotal evidence, and logic and conclusions based on things we know about physiology. But full blown peer-reviewed and published research about SS-style squatting in a 3x5 linear progression? I'm not sure there is any.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Thanks for the responses. I haven't been able to come up with anything other than the NSCA position paper from 2009. The paper does advocate a 3 x 5ish program for an "experienced" lifter (9 months or more of continuous training) but not for novices which what I will be dealing with. So, I will probably meet 1/2 way and implement 10RM loads. This group will still see great results from the programming.

    I'll keep looking and will gladly listen to more thoughts and opinions on the topic. It's too bad expert opinion, hours of observation, knowledge of physiological adaptations to stress, and common sense can't be justification enough for some people. At least I get to put weight on their backs this summer. Thanks coaches.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7,856

    Default

    It is a shame, as is the current state of exercise science research, that produces such a small percentage of quality papers compared to the total number published.

    However, if the only accommodation you need to make is sets of 10 instead of sets of 5, you'll have a better situation than many strength coaches, who are handcuffed by much worse silliness than that.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    SF, CA
    Posts
    4,994

    Default

    Doesn't specifically address the %rm you should use for training, but check out the BFS white-paper on squats as well: http://biggerfasterstronger.com/uplo...llel-squat.pdf

    It sings the praises of squats etc. (and it's footnoted in the text, but doesn't seem to include the actual references. Maybe the print version has them)

    It also has pictures of happy smiling girls and also mentions some relatively high numbers so that your boss won't be shocked if she sees girls handling 135lbs or something.
    Understanding the importance of depth
    in squats is imperative. We base our standards on a parallel depth or slightly below
    it. The high school All American standard is
    500 pounds for males with heavy builds and
    325 pounds for females with heavy builds.
    The all-state standard is 400 pounds for
    males and 235 pounds (think two plates and
    a collar) for females. BFS set those standards
    to help athletes and coaches understand
    when an athlete achieves something remarkable. Only an exceptional athlete with special
    understanding of how to do squats can reach
    those standards. If an athlete squats a foot
    high, or three inches high with 500 pounds,
    it is meaningless. Not a whole lot is really
    happening, and the athlete will miss out on
    great benefits.
    You can also point to the BFS strength program which says:
    The strength portion of the BFS program, in-season, is set up on four-week cycles, with each week consisting of core lifts performed on specific days. The cycles consist of the following Set/Rep cycles: 3x3, 5x5, 5-4-3-2-1, and 10-8-6 (or 4-4-2 for the power clean and Hex bar deadlift). During the season, the same Set/Rep cycles are used, but the workout is performed only twice a week. This variety ensures that the athlete is able to continually break personal records, even during the season – there are no plateaus in the BFS program.
    http://www.biggerfasterstronger.com/...amStrength.asp
    Since people are setting PRs on 3x3 and 5x5 it strongly suggests that they're handling weights in excess of their 10rm.

    The BFS stuff may be compelling because they are widely used in high-schools and have a long track record. You may not want to push them TOO hard since your boss may then demand that you just do BFS, but you can certainly leverage their stuff to establish the validity of your basic approach.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    74

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Actually, BFS is what drove them out of the high school weight room. To be fair, it wasn't the BFS programming so much as the person in charge of the weight room. From my understanding, a teacher/football coach, implemented the BFS program a few years back and it wasn't pretty. He employed current and former high school football players to be his "coaches" and the experience caused the soccer coach to pull the girls from the program. No quality control concerning form or safety standards being met.

    Thanks for the white pages though.....I will strategically leave them out to be seen.

    As Coach Wolf pointed out.....settling for 10 reps instead of 5 is tolerable. I was using bodyweight 2 years ago, 40lb DBs last year and now I have 2 squat racks and bumper plates now where I used to have none. Progress is being made. I'll keep the pressure on and see what I can come up with.

    Thanks again for all the insights, it is appreciated.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •