This is the NSCA’s Coaching Podcast, where strength and conditioning coaches share their experience, lessons learned, and advice about how to thrive in a highly competitive profession.

For many athletes, being agile is the end goal of physical performance training. It represents their capacity to change velocity and direction in response to the actions of their opponent and the opportunities and constraints of their environment. The aim of this article was to describe the pitch-based development of agility, focusing on 60–1808 turns. This ensures all turns have the demand of deceleration, turning, and reacceleration, requiring both outside leg turns (608) and inside leg turns (1808). To enable the effective coaching of these, coaches must understand movement mechanics and thus the fundamental principles that underpin good technique. Within agility training, a detailed appreciation of how the center of mass and base of support interact to affect the direction of force is fundamental to this. This understanding and the ensuing technical models ensure athletes have the best chance of executing the task optimally and ensure coaches can effectively instruct athletes and adapt drills accordingly.

The implementation of long-term athletic development (LTAD) aims to improve health, physical activity, and performance of all youth. Contemporary LTAD models suggest that a broad range of physical and psychosocial competencies should be developed in youth, but few resources are available for coaches that describe “how” to achieve these outcomes. This article overviews a coaching session framework built around the following components: raise, activate, mobilize, prepare, activity, games, evaluate (RAMPAGE). The framework provides practitioners with information on what can be planned and delivered and when within a coaching session, across multiple ages and stages of development within multiple contexts (e.g., physical education and talent development).

This award for career achievement was created in honor of Alvin Roy, who helped establish strength and conditioning as the cornerstone of any athletic training program.

Deloading is a period of reduced training stress where training demand is intentionally reduced to mitigate physiological and psychological fatigue and promote recovery. A deload is commonly implemented to enhance readiness for subsequent training and occurs between or during training phases. During a deload, training is typically modified by reducing the intensity of effort, training volume, duration, or frequency. Adjustments in exercise selection are based on recovery goals and the specific demands of the athlete’s training. Deloads are commonly preplanned and implemented into the training program every 4–8 weeks based on the structure of the training cycle and recovery needs. Alternatively, deloads are sometimes applied reactively using an autoregulatory approach to accommodate unexpected fatigue or performance decrements. While deloading shares conceptual similarities with tapering and training cessation, it should be differentiated based on its objective, structure, and positionality with the overall training program. The purpose of this article is to describe the current research landscape, propose areas for future research, and to provide broad practical recommendations for implementing deloading within the strength and physique sports training program.

Are you a member of the U.S. Armed Forces? Are you transitioning out of the military and looking for new career opportunities? Service Members are now eligible for reimbursement when they pursue the NSCA’s Tactical Strength and Conditioning Facilitator® (TSAC-F®) certification.

The National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) Advocates to Raise the Certification Standards with the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)

Get NSCA’s Essentials of Tactical Strength and Conditioning, Second Edition — a trusted resource for TSAC-F® exam prep and military and public safety training.

An individual’s training status is a key factor used to determine the volume, the intensity, and the selection of exercises for resistance training prescription. Interestingly, there are no objective parameters to assess training status, so there is ambiguity in determining the appropriate volume and other resistance training variables in this regard. Thus, the objective of this study was to propose a strategy for classification and determination of resistance training status. The following five parameters were identified and used: (a) current uninterrupted training time, (b) time of detraining, (c) previous training experience, (d) exercise technique, and (e) strength level. Moreover, 4 classification levels are proposed: beginner, intermediate, advanced, and highly advanced, which are determined by the mean score of the parameters used. The proposed model represents an important advancement in training status classification and can be used as a valid tool for training prescription and for researchers to better characterize a sample and reproduce results under the same conditions in future studies.