http://www.intensitymagazine.com/11-27-01/the_foundation.html
THE FOUNDATION
by Chris Korfist
"Always be careful of what you jump into." I am not referring to the warning that your mother says to you as you writhe in pain after having jumped into something. I am referring to everyone's "missing link" in athletic development—plyometrics, or to others, shock training. As I read forums, talk to coaches and athletes this seemingly simple concept always comes up in conversation. If you are strong but you can't run good 40s or get good starts, there is of course an easy solution—start doing Plyometrics. If a team has speed and they don't look as though they should possess it, there is again an easy explanation—they have trained using Plyometrics. However, I think this easy solution is not so easy. In fact, I believe it is one of the most misunderstood aspects of training here in America.
I believe Plyometrics were introduced to the United States back in the 70s. Soviet sprinters were dominating the Olympic fields and U.S. coaches wanted to know why. So in the mid-1960s a bunch of U.S. coaches traveled to the USSR to observe their workouts with hope of finding the "missing link" in their training. One of the activities they observed was an athlete stepping off a box, hitting the ground and jumping up. This of course was the visual interpretation of Verkhoshansky's "shock training." And according to a story I believe I heard from Mel Siff, the Soviets thought they would have some fun with the Americans and convince them that their athletes do this exercise from a 10-foot height. The American coaches returned to the U.S. and started spreading the word about their new discovery. Of course, nobody pays any attention to the other aspects of their training and the tremendous base level training that was performed. Word spreads, Don Chu writes some books, and suddlenly American athletes in search of speed are dropping out of the sky everywhere and trying to rebound into a jump; most limp away with broken ankles or struggle to understand why they didn't achieve the same level of success as the great Soviet sprinter Valeri Borzov. If you talk to a Russian or a South African, they laugh and tell you this is the American way because we have taken a small part of a enormous Soviet training system and created a giant monster.
I think the first problem comes from general misunderstanding of where we borrowed the system. The USSR had a complicated system of developing athletes. They started when the athletes were young and placed the hopefuls in a multi-year program that built volume and technique over time. They were patient. So when their athletes were 18 years of age, they already had 6 years of solid training that was scientifically planned. Once these athletes reached a certain level, somewhere between the age of 18-20 depending on their strength deficit, they might have started shock training. All aspects of the depth jump, such has breath control and footwear are closely monitored. Rest periods ranged as high as 4 minutes between a single rep to 15 minutes between sets. There was a plan. The Soviets did not randomly open a book and declare, "Comrades, today, we will begin plyometrics, whether you need them or not!" To confuse things further, American coaches have simplified the original complex system to fit into American training programs.
The second problem comes from the American application of the training. True plyometrics or shock training is the simple box jump. Time needs to be spent learning the step off the box. It is a relaxed fall and not a jump off the box. The focus of training is on quality and not quantity. In America, more is always better, so instead of doing 20 good jumps every 5-14 days depending on the cycle, an excited coach may do 100 jumps every other day. This is a sure recipe for injury. Also, if the research says that they are good and can make you faster, why not make every athlete in the program do them, even though they can't squat properly or broad jump without falling. Again, athletes need to be prepared to do these exercises in order for them to be effective.
So, am I advocating the abolition of plyometrics from your athletic training? Of course not—we utilize a precise and delicate solution to get the results we do. It depends on the program, the athletes and the coach. If you have a well-planned multi-year, multi-cycle program, I would recommend them at the end of your program; for example, at the end of the pre-competition phase in their Junior and senior year. If you have a multi-year program and your athletes have mastered various Olympic lifts and have a strong torso, then your athletes will probably benefit from the exercises. And if you are a coach that is willing to take the time to teach proper jumping form and have the patience to go through a proper workout, then I would recommend plyometrics. If you do not feel that you can address these issues in a positive manner, then stick to hopping and chain or band box squats but above and beyond all else, a long-term plan of attack will realize the results you yearn for.
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
