Last night
I read an article that will appear in the New York Times Sunday Magazine on
Sunday May 11 called “The Uneven Playing Field” by Michael Sokolove. It is an
excerpt from a book called “Warrior Girls: Protecting Our Daughters Against
The Injury Epidemic in Women’s Sports.” When I read the article last
night I was taken aback. My first reaction was shock, then disgust and then
anger. Read this excerpt and I will follow with my thoughts:
Girls and boys diverge in their
physical abilities as they enter puberty
and move through adolescence. Higher levels of testosterone
allow boys to add muscle and, even without much effort on their part, get
stronger. In turn, they become less flexible. Girls, as their estrogen levels
increase, tend to add fat rather than muscle. They must train rigorously to get
significantly stronger. The influence of estrogen makes girls’ ligaments lax,
and they outperform boys in tests of overall body flexibility — a performance
advantage in many sports, but also an injury risk when not accompanied by
sufficient muscle to keep joints in stable, safe positions. Girls tend to run
differently than boys — in a less-flexed, more-upright posture — which may put
them at greater risk when changing directions and landing from jumps. Because
of their wider hips, they are more likely to be knock-kneed — yet another
suspected risk factor.
Sure there are physical differences,
but the more we accentuate them the bigger they will be. Today the young female
is severely short changed because of the constant stream of information like
that presented in this article. Unfortunately this is what the parents, coaches
and the girls themselves read and believe.
To a
certain extent the next paragraph is true:
This divergence between the sexes occurs
just at the moment when we increasingly ask more of young athletes, especially
if they show talent: play longer, play harder, play faster, play for higher
stakes. And we ask this of boys and girls equally — unmindful of physical
differences. The pressure to concentrate on a “best” sport before even entering
middle school — and to play it year-round — is bad for all kids. They wear down
the same muscle groups day after day. They have no time to rejuvenate, let
alone get stronger. By playing constantly, they multiply their risks and simply
give themselves too many opportunities to get hurt.
Why am I upset? Because
once again we totally miss the point. Don’t set the bar lower because they are
girls. Set the same expectation for training as the boys. Girls do respond to
training. Come and see the Venice Girls Volleyball team and you will see girls with
muscles. They train and work at it year around. They prepare to play, not just
play the game and practice the skill. The girls who performed poorly on the Athletic
Profile have specific remedial work to do. There are different training groups
based on the specific training task that day, one size does not fit all.
Sure once past puberty
females have a different endocrine hormonal profile than men, that does not
mean they do not have the capacity to train and subsequently adapt to that
training, it is not a fait accompli that they will get hurt. This whole article
overlooks several key factors, not the least of which is the fact that in long
term athlete development process the female athlete is victimized by a system
that throws them into competition and skill development before they have the
physical base of preparation. They over compete and under train and are coached
by coaches that have no formal training as coaches and do not understand the
needs of the female athlete. The system or lack thereof rewards the more aggressive
girls who develop earlier and does not take into account the girl who not as aggressive.
In addition there is an incessant search for athletic scholarships that causes
the girls to over compete to showcase their talents.
There are some simple
solutions:
Improve the quality of coaching.
Limit
the number of competitions a girl can compete in until physical benchmarks are
achieved.
Institute
daily mandatory physical education Kindergarten through twelfth grade.
Recognize
that the female athlete must strength train year around.
All the BS about different
landing and running mechanics is just that, pure bull shitake. Poor landing and
running mechanics 99% of the time are due to lack of strength, the ability to handle
their own bodyweight. You can blame lack of core strength, whatever that is, but
it is really a lack of strength throughout the entire kinetic chain. There must
be a daily investment in strength training as part of warm-up that includes exercises
that are mindful and proprioceptively demanding. Training is a year around
proposition, not just something you do six weeks before the start of the season
for thirty minutes three times a week. The answer lies in commitment to a
consistent athletic development program that encompasses the lifespan of the
female athlete. Seven year olds beginning to play should have activities that challenge
balance and proprioception coupled with strength oriented movements that require
control of body weight in multiple planes.
We do not need more articles
like this. We need more practical high quality information in the hands of the parents;
coach’s and teachers so they can be more aware and better prepare the girls for
the rigors of training and competition.
fame. I was first exposed to his ideas in an article my high school football
coach gave me an article he wrote in 1964. Over the next sixteen years I read
everything he wrote that I could get my hands on. Sometime in the late 1970’s,
the exact year escapes me, we shared the podium at The Runners World Sponsored National
Running Week Symposium. We spoke on 
Strength Training for Runners. What an
honor to share the podium with him. He passed away sometime in the 1980’s and
frankly I lost track of his work until the late 90’s when I was going through
my library and some files and found a gold mine of his material. I did not
realize how much of an influence his ideas had on me. He was preaching tri-plane
work in the late 1940’s. Big emphasis on rotary work, a surprise to 
the gurus of
today who think invented rotary work. His training made
extensive use of
dumbbells, swing bells and body weight movements in addition to traditional
lifting movements. If you can obtain any of his books they are well worth
reading. His ideas are very contemporary; he was a man ahead of his time. The older
I get and the more I coach the more I realize that we are all traveling paths blazed
by pioneers like John Jesse. It is almost trite to say that we stand on the
shoulders of giants. His work was more the norm rather than the exception in
his day. Sound methodology based on good pedagogy grounded in science. We need
more John Jesse’s today.
