BUP (pt.2) - Choosing Variables and Tracking Data
For background to this article, an introduction to BUP and tracking data can be found in a previous blog post here [1].
1 How do we know what is worth tracking?
One can definitely be overwhelmed with the amount of variables that could possibly be tracked. What makes this tougher, is that what variables are relevant can completely depend on the individual athlete (and even on a particular point in a given athlete's career).
We now ask the main question for this section:
What qualities must a training variable posses in order to be worthwhile tracking?
As it was part of a recent discussion I had with one of the other coaches, Andrew, I'd like to use warm-ups as an example here.
A fairly reasonable assumption to make is that one’s warmups (weight, etc) should adapt to their top sets as they progress. If this is the case - as it is for most athletes - then any trends present in tracking volume cycle to cycle would still be visible if you decided to track warmups also, just at a higher relative number. Tracking the warmups in this case gives little to no new information, and over long periods of time could possibly mess up any data you have on an athlete with unnecessary over-fitting.
As with everything, there are always exceptions. If an athlete is injured, for example, the exact workload the injured tissue is being subject to needs to be carefully watched and managed. An obvious way to do this would be prescribed warm ups and work up sets. In this case, the extra volume isn’t being tracked for the sake of monitoring specific trends over the block, but now the actual value of the volume is of immediate importance, and must be carefully maintained below a certain threshold.
Note: Not only is the total volume important to track here, but another important aggravating variable to keep track of when programming for an injured athlete is 'Time-Under-Tension', or 'TUT' for short.
Another of the subtleties in this area brought up in my discussion with Andrew applies specifically to RPE programming. If an athlete is continuously taking warm up sets close to their prescribed top set RPE, does this not count as a significant enough stimulus to track?
The best way this can resolve itself is hoping that the athlete matures into understanding what are intelligent jumps to take depending on how their body is feeling that day, in order not to be consistently stranded less than 1 RPE point away from their goal set, followed by then making a small jump to hit their RPE goal. This situation would in-effect incur a stimulus like that of two top-sets, which if isn't tracked or wanted, will introduce inaccuracies and inconsistencies into your data collection.
An active approach would be to maybe track the achieved RPE alongside the prescribed RPE, and tell the athlete to leave the set there, even though it’s slightly undershot. As long as the RPE is 0.5-1 points away, the stimulus should be close enough to the goal to not warrant too much fuss. Any bigger of a difference though and worries about not having a consistent stimulus to respond to week to week start to creep in over the block.
To answer the main question of this section, I'll lay out a checklist that will hopefully act as some sort of guidance on choosing data to track:
Is the variable (within reason) easily track-able?
Is the resultant data interpret-able? In other words, can you construct a some-what accurate picture of the effects this data has on the athlete and their training? Beyond this, can you devise a plan in order to construct a block with this new data in mind?
Does gathering this data give you any new insights that data you are already tracking not give you?
If the athlete needs to put in work themselves to relay this data onto you, do they understand the significance of it? From my own experience as both an athlete and a coach, you are more likely to receive accurate, consistent input from the athlete concerning this data if they are aware of the reasons you feel it is important to gather. At the end of the day, they are paying you for coaching and programming, so it is up to you, as a coach, to properly inform them of the importance of anything you require of them. This point can be expanded to seeing the importance of keeping your athletes clued in on everything you do for them, as it will lead to a more productive athlete/coach relationship.
2 Block Reviews
An easy way to summarise the main results of a block is to include a block review at the end of the block. This serves a few purposes.
Firstly, although you should definitely keep the raw data in its entirety for a block safe somewhere, a block review can act as a handy summary of the main things that worked/could have been optimized in relation to a given block. How was the athlete's response to this rep/RPE setup? Were the average fatigue levels higher than usual? What is your first guess at the cause of this? Were there any abnormalities that occurred throughout this block that might invalidate some of the data? (missed training days, etc.) Did the athlete enjoy the block? Did they feel that the block dragged on for too long? In this case you could jot down in the review what you plan to do to shorten block length in the future.
A block review should serve 2 main purposes:
It should allow you to easily glance over the main variables you are tracking this block and your first opinions on how the athlete responded. (You can carry-out more accurate analyses elsewhere when you compare the data to previous blocks.)
The athlete should be able to provide some input that will be displayed in the block analysis. Was there any problems with pain during this block? Was this caused by any of the movements in particular? Also parroting what I said above, you should allow input on their enjoyment of this block.