Programming: Pt. 1, Stress Based Individualization

In programming, it is important to understand and be aware of individual factors affecting different athletes. In simple terms, not everybody is ever in the same exact place (physically, or mentally for that matter), and not all workouts affect everybody the same. This realistically applies to all aspects of training- throwing, conditioning, lifting, mobility, etc. I’ll specifically be talking about the throwing side of things in this blog series.

As mentioned in previous posts, we heavily utilize MotusThrow data in our programming and development. In a team setting, specifically, I believe MotusThrow is one of the best ways to quickly gather individual data daily, as necessary. One way that we have utilized MotusThrow is through the stress data (Nm torque). Recently, I have worked to collect data on some of the different types of workloads that we include into programming, including live outings, bullpens, and short boxes. I chose these simple workloads to start with, because we are currently approaching the spring season and these will be common areas of focus throughout the season. Most of planning will be done around when live outings are and when we are able to get any side mound work in.

In general, I have seen that stress numbers (Nm Torque) vary heavily between the 3. For the most part it is about as you might expect, in order of most to least stressful:

1. Live

2. Bullpen

3. Short Box

This is essentially what I expected. However, even though I understood this would likely be a generalized conclusion, understanding more specifically, exactly how each day affects different guys, is a huge help in programming and being able to manipulate when and how often different stress loads are placed throughout a program. Some guys have larger differences in stress averages between the 3, while some are actually very close in difference, or not exactly in line with the general trend. This is essentially what I expected. However, even though I understood this would likely be a generalized conclusion, understanding more specifically, exactly how each day affects different guys, is a huge help in programming and being able to manipulate when and how often different stress loads are placed throughout a program. Some guys have larger differences in stress averages between the 3, while some are actually very close in difference, or not exactly in line with the general trend.

Pictured above, is an example of three slightly different athletes, with stress level comparisons with each other and our team average. As you see, each has different stress levels at each of the different workloads. Not all are exactly along the team trend and not all vary to the same degree.

Using this information for in season programming can be very valuable. For example, before, I may have programmed a short box or even no mound work for a guy that had a heavier workload over a weekend, simply because I thought he needed a lighter day. Now, with the same guy, I might be able to confidently program a short box or even full bullpen work, based on how the different loads stress the arm. The same can be said the other way around…for a specific pitcher, I may have before thought a short box would be fine because I assumed it was a relatively light load, but it actually taxes his arm near or as high, in terms of torque on the elbow, as a live outing. For this guy, something else might be a better option. With this information, I’m now able to confidently and accurately prepare each individual based on what they specifically need, while keeping them in a relatively safe environment. This aids in keeping guys fresh and healthy throughout a long season, without the guess work.

This information along with A:C Ratio data, helps to decrease injury risk throughout a season, while keeping guys fresh and maximizing weekly work. I am able to use stress data, to understand how a specific workload stresses the arm, and ACR data to manipulate volumes of these workloads.

Obviously having Motus sleeves for each guy can be expensive and may not be in the budget for many schools. However, with the stress management information, it’s not completely necessary to have a sleeve for each guy. One way to go about this, is to buy just one, or a couple sleeves, and use them simply for test-retest purposes. Going with this route would simply require guys to throw with the sleeve as often as testing occurred, and could be done individually.

Without using Motus, it is still somewhat doable, but be aware, you are guessing to a large degree. Regular surveys or assessment should be done to get the most accurate and up to date information on how guys are responding. Numbered scales can be used to infer response as well as RPE/effort levels.

In conclusion, it is imperative that, as coaches, we understand that every athlete is different and should be treated different. General programs are fine, but only as beginner programs. Adjustments and adaptations should be made regularly, on an individual bases. Understand how workloads affect individual players, and how players respond accordingly.

Sean Stacy