I always hear how people want to get “In shape”, and while I have a general fuzzy idea what that could entail it is not something that is in anyway clearly defined, and certainly not measureable.  If you are unable to accurately define or measure it then you will not be able to develop a plan to lead you to your goal.  Without a clear definition it is hard not only to follow a path, that path could be the wrong one.  The first step for me is changing the name.  I’ll skip using some of the common terms such as ‘conditioning’, ‘cardio’, ‘General Physical Preparedness’, or ‘functional modalities’ as well.  My definition begins with using the term Work Capacity as that establishes a clearer picture of what it is I would like to improve, my ability to do work.

The following story demonstrates that this focus on terminology/definition leads to bigger issues beyond simple semantics.  Last summer I was asked for the help by the coach of a team sport to develop some programs to improve the performance for his athletes on the field.  The root of his request was that he did not know if his conditioning drills would actually net increased performance in the game.  He then proceeded to detail how he and the other coaches he knew measured if their athletes were going to see improvements.  This common practice was based around the fact that improved cardiovascular health as measured by Heart Rate would = improved performance on the field.  The test was to get their athletes heart rate up and then measure how long it took return to specific range. 

While I suppose an argument could be made that there is some logic behind this approach, I’m going to stick with saying this approach is straight lunacy.  As a coach and as an athlete I could care less what my heart rate is doing, well as long as it’s still ‘doing’ I suppose.  What I care about is if I am accomplishing more in my event.  Does it really matter if one person’s heart is racing at 140bpm and another’s at 120bpm if they are both accomplishing the same thing?  In the end the measureable is the result of the total work they put in during the game.

The whole measuring heart rate = cardiovascular health = improved performance is simply wrong and could lead to a dissertation on Correlation does not imply Causation to argue that point.  Clear definitions and ability to accurately measure progress towards that definition are required.

Setting aside the whole correlation vs. causation argument aside, this method is also a complete failure for another reason.  The Heart Rate approach only analyzed a measure the cardiovascular system when there are many systems affecting total work output.  These other systems affecting work output include cardiovascular, metabolic, neurohumoral, neuromuscular, and sensorimotor.  It is possible with today’s technology to go about measuring all these systems independently, however quite expensive and certainly not realistic for this setting.  Without being able to measure all these systems that affect work capacity you have to go back to the basics and measuring the OUTPUT of all these systems.

First you must understand what it is that you are measuring.  As established at the beginning of this article it is Work Capacity, and work capacity is simply the total amount of work that can be done in a given timeframe.  If the work capacity goes up the athlete will be able to get more punches in during a fight, get more pedal rotations on the bike during the race, or be able to increase the number of kettlebell swings.  These are the important things to a coach, trainer, and athlete.  These are the things that WIN.

With a definition you now need to develop a way of determining if you are improving work capacity without expensive, time consuming, or unavailable testing.  This leaves you with the most straightforward and accurate way possible of simply measuring the work capacity itself.  Develop training programs where both the work output and the time are measured, and then you can determine if improvements are made.  More importantly another factor comes into play here as well that no testing will determine.  This factor is the athletes the amount of psychological conditioning the athlete is prepared to push themself, which can be influenced by you as the athlete or coach.

If you take a simple kettlebell swing an athlete can show increased work capacity with the following methods:

- Doing the same number of swings in a shorter time

- Doing same swing in the same time with increased weight

- Doing more swings in the same amount of time.

- Extending the number of swing

- Extending the amount of time the can maintain that swing rate

It is imperative that you pic drills that not only mimic the sport but the Work Capacity can be measured just as the kettlebell bell swing is measured above.  These measures are all different ways of measuring the two variables:

- Load

- Time

Looking at it from an athletic perspective you would need to setup these tests/drills in a manner that mimics the performance events in:

- Motion

- Interval Frequency

- Intensity

If you keep these rules in mind you should be able to develop effective training method(s) and understanding the impact to the athletes work capacity.  Improved work capacity should have a direct impact on performance in their given sport when setup correctly.

Below is an unmatched feat of strength and conditioning developed through these very methods.