I feel like I’ve heard you guys say we shouldn’t train to specifically but also needs to be specific enough. I’m assuming specific means we should practice the specific joint angles and velocities etc.
So two question:
how specific is too specific? Ex: we shouldn’t train with a heavy golf club to practice swings or punch with dumbbells to practice boxing.
Why wouldn’t we train this way if it is technically specific?
If you’ve attended one of our seminars, yes. The idea is that very specific training limits the breadth of adaptations generated, increases risk of overuse injury, and limits motor learning- among other things. That said, if the training is too broad- adaptations may be spread too thin.
Joint angles and movement velocities are related to specificity, yes.
I’m assuming a heavy golf club changes our techniques. But couldn’t we also say that doing squat jumps for increasing vertical jump (like you’ve recommended) change our jumping technique too ?
Also I would say it’s specific because it is the same joint angle, ROM, just not the same velocity but neither is the squat jump for vertical jump training.
Maybe, but does this hinder transference to a particular parameter of the golf swing, e.g. club head speed, smash factor, etc.? Overspeed training with lighter implements, which also changes the movement slightly, is common in golf and has demonstrable benefits.
I don’t know that I would say that either.
I’m not exactly clear what you’re saying here. The precise velocity, joint angle, muscle lengths, etc. don’t have to be 100% exactly the same for the movement to be beneficial.