INSIDE THE MINDS OF COLLEGIATE THROWS COACHES

IMPLEMENT A THROWING PROGRAM TO MAXIMIZE A COLLEGIATE STUDENT-

ATHLETE’S THROWING SUCCESS

Christopher K. Witscher

ABSTRACT

GOAL• The research delves inside the mind of a

collegiate throws coach.• The results reveal what collegiate coaches have in

mind, and the transparency of the coaches’ thoughts of what it takes to create and implement a throwing programto benefit and maximize a collegiate student-athlete’s potential based on the accessibility of the survey results on the author’s website and in the research.

LITERATURE REVIEW

GOAL OF RESEARCH

• Obtain information on throwing programs and procedures from inside the minds of collegiate coaches who have gained experience from the success of their student-athletes.

LITERATURE REVIEW

EFFECTIVE COACHING

• Do coaches continue to study and research effective coaching in the throwing field arena?

• How coaches learn to coach and how they implement what they coachispersonal, andprimarily based on prior coaching experience.

LITERATURE REVIEW

• Little to none written about field throwing by successful coaches in the collegiate area.

• Wide gap in the area of throwing strategies, methods, and practice.

• Traditional networking of coaches was primarily phone, face-to-face informal encounters, camps, or videos (Pagani, 2002).

BACKGROUND

OPERATING A SUCCESSFUL THROWS PROGRAM

• Weightlifting

–Coaches agreed about maximizing in the weight room.

• Training practice

–Coaches agreed about how many throws a day and week an athlete should perform per event.

BACKGROUND

• Training methods

–Coaches agreed as evident by guidelines and shared philosophy via videos and throwing camps (Logan, 2000).

• Training for success

–Coaches had individualized perceptions of how athletes train for success (Pagani, 2002).

METHODS- PARTICIPANTS

• Collegiate Divisions I,II,III coaches participated in the survey:– 12 Females– 24 Males

• Coaches* – 18 West region– 11 East region– 5 Midwest region

• Degrees held– 18 BA– 17MA– 1 PhD

* Responses received

MATERIALS

• The survey was created on experience and questions to discover what collegiate coaches do to operate a successful throwing program.

• The survey isdivided infour categories: weight-training, training practice, training for success and training methods.

PROCEDURES

• Survey distributed by email and available on the website:throwernetwork.com.

• Coaches were able to start the survey and stop if needed, and then continue at a different time.

• Participants completed the survey by a specific date.

RESULTS• The analyses focus on participants’ answers of

the questions thatwere divided into four categories.

• Participants’ responses were analyzed on a total of 63 questions: 17 questions focused on weight training; 30 questions on training practice; eight questions on training for success;eight questions on training methods.

RESULTS

• Weightlifting – Student-athlete’s should max 1-2 times in the

weight room during pre-season.

– Coaches implement sport-specific weight lifting into regimen.

– Student-athlete’s should throw heavy and lift heavy for a four week cycle and have one week of rest.

RESULTS• Training practices

–60-105 throws a week for the shot-put.

–90-135 throws a week for the discus.

–90-135 throws a week for the hammer.

–50 and below throws a week for the javelin.

RESULTS

• Training for success

– Commitment, technical improvements, strength drills, mental and emotional stability and goals.

– Using other implements than competition weights to gain distance in throwing events.

– Throwing repetitions are more effective than drilling repetitions for gaining distance in events.

RESULTS• Training methods

– Shot-put glide technique: line hops, A-drill, pivot drill, and glide with stick on back.

– Rotational technique for discus and shot-put: pivot drill, wheel drill (half-spin), South Africans, and left leg drills.

– Hammer technique: two hammer winds, chain throws, heavy plate throws, and multiple turns.

– Javelin technique: Penultimate steps, approaches, creek jumps, and over-head med ball throw.

7

8

7

4

1

2

00

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

60-75 75-90 90-105 105-120 120-135 135-150 150+

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of throws

How many throws a week should an athlete perform for shot put?

10

5

9

4

10

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

90-105 105-120 120-135 135-150 150-165 165-180 180+

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of throws

How many throws a week should an athlete perform for hammer?

10

7 7

3 3

0 00

2

4

6

8

10

12

90-105 105-120 120-135 135-150 150-165 165-180 180+

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of throws

How many throws a week should an athlete perform for discus?

16

8

32

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Below 50

50-65 65-80 80-105 105-120 120-135 135-150 150+

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of throws

How many throws a week should an athlete perform for javelin?

2

4

7

10

0

2

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1 week 2 weeks 3 weeks 4 weeks 5 weeks 6 weeks 7 weeks

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of weeks

If the athletes lift heavy and throw heavy, how long should this training

last?

27

1 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 week 2 weeks 3 weeks 4 weeks 5 weeks 6 weeks

# o

f co

ach

es

resp

on

ses

# of weeks

How long is a rest cycle for the athletes?

22

8

2

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

1-2 3-4 5-6 7+ No Answer

Tota

l # o

f re

spo

nse

s

# of times athletes max in weight room during pre-season

How many times during the pre-season do your athletes max in the

weight room?

12

10

4

2

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

# o

f re

spo

nse

s

# of times athletes max in weight room during season

How many times do the athletes max in the weight room during

season?

18.6

20.6

19.6

18.6

17.5

18

18.5

19

19.5

20

20.5

21

Weight lifting Practice Success Methods

Me

an

Mean of the Four Categories

5.5

4.1

4.5

3.4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Weight lifting Practice Success Methods

Stan

dar

d D

evi

atio

n

Standard Deviation of the Four Categories

DISCUSSION• Collegiate coaches share the same perception

in training student-athletes to maximize their potential within all the categories.

• The study has significant value for the next steps, which includes fully developing the website: throwernetwork.com

• Immediate responses and answers to student-athlete’s and coaches can be found on the website to help with training.

CONCLUSION• The study offers significant findings in order to

create and develop future work in the area to maximize a student-athlete’s potential in the throws program.

• Better networking for coaches and athlete’s.

• Better clarity amongst collegiate coaches and athletes.

• Accessibility to throwernetwork.com to view and analyze the throwing events.