Thanks for that Jacob

is that good because im 14 and i got 12.7 is that good for my age.

Yes jake, you win.

Love the holidays...

Beep test is old and especially inaccurate for a sport like basketball. Bill Foran's 15s are much better indicator and yo-yo test would be the next best thing; think they use yo-yo at AIS.

Personally when I look at a player's performance measure I'd be much more interested in 20m sprint, agility and power.

Yes, agility and power.

Last time i was tested i only got a 10.1 in beep test, but a 17 in Agility and a 4723409 in power.

Must better measurement, agreed.

LA Boy the beep test is not "inaccurate", it gives an excellent prediction of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max). Which is but one of the variables they tested.

Without going into detail here, you could argue that the aerobic system is important for recovery between intermittent bouts of high intensity exercise (ie basketball). So whilst not a factor in one vertical jump or one sprint alone, but in the ability to recover between quarters or games etc. Yes there are other factors, again I'm not going into detail here because it is not necessary for my point. In basketball it has been shown that VO2 is dependant on position and level of play.

Once a level of aerobic fitness above the population mean is met, there are no further benefits of recovery from high-intensity activity. Basically it is improtant to reach a certain level in the "beep test", if you will, but training over and above this level is not only a waste of time, but can be detremental to the basketball athlete.

My point is it is a very good test for estimating VO2 max quickly, which is one of the variables tested, and not "inaccurate". I believe they also would have tested sprint speed, possibly a repeat sprint ability test, agility (if i was a betting man i'd say a 505 as now days that's what most use, very good test btw) and most likely some power tests such as a vertical and likely some weight lifting tests, common practices in most elite sports to do a complete physical testing profile. Could be wrong on what was tested, but that's my guess.

When it comes to beep test knowledge I'll back ITA.. The yoda of beep test threads...

I think where it's in accurate is that the distance between the lines isn't always consistent, so someone gets a 14 at their hight school training and thinks they're an elite athlete when in reality the distance between the lines was a metre or 2 shorter than the standard.

lol TR owned :(

I bit... wasn't going to post, but the word "inaccurate" got me as the test does exactly what it is supposed to do... estimate VO2.

I'll make an effort to leave them alone now :P

Having said that... Billo... the test is not inaccurate. It stipulates 20 m. That would be a sloppy tester, not the tests fault.

some case study from NHL:

Athlete 1
27yo
Peak VO2 51.5
Peak HR 172
At VO2 48.4
At HR 165
% Efficiency 93%
1min recovery 50BPM

Athlete 2
28yo
Peak VO2 53.1
Peak HR 181
At VO2 41.5
At HR 163
% Efficiency 77%
1min recovery 25BPM

Above is a classical illustration why VO2 stats can be misleading and "inaccurate" when concluding the conditioning status of an athlete. Looking at VO2 alone it seems Athlete 2 is fitter however athlete 1 is 93% efficient while athlete 2 is 77% efficient; athlete 1 also has much better recovery rate.

In the past I've seen sport coaches praising their athletes for a good beep test score then declare them unfit a day later based on physiological data, that's just foolish.

A little out of topic, I remember reading a paper by USC a few years ago where they actually found a correlation that athletes with higher MVO2 resulted in less power production.

just if you guys are wondering what's the evaluation in the states for basketball:

Conditioning: (i) Cycle Ergometer (ii) The Woodway Force- a much more specific measure of an athlete's conditioning based on power, speed, HR etc.

Strength: Front Squat, Bench Press, Deadlift

Power: Snatch, Clean-Jerk

SAQ: 3/4 Court Sprint, Lane Agility or Baseline Recovery

Screen: FMS

------------------------------------------------------

From a scout/coaches' perspective conditioning is the least concerned element out of the 5, quoting one of the premier performance coach "it only takes a summer to get somebody conditioned but it takes years to get somebody strong"- that's why I'd much rather look at other data than this.

PS: Dontae Jones comes to mind, Pop did a great job with him to get him in shape in such a short amount of time. He was pretty unfit when first reported to Dragons' camp.

LA Boy,

The beep test is not "inaccurate". It has been shown to be the most valid and reliable field test for estimating VO2. However you may question why the basketball athlete uses this test.

You are going to use a cycle ergometer as a MORE valid test for basketball athletes **CRINGE**

Have a look at the NSCA site (it's American, you'll feel at home ;-)) and the field tests that are used in many publications (as they are much cheaper and quicker, plus more sport specific than lab tests) and I think you'll find they are similar to those that I mentioned.

In terms of your strength/ power tests, specifically clean and jerk / snatch. Very good training exercises, but never ever ever, not a snowflakes chance in hell would I use them as a TEST for basketball athletes, yes as an exercise for basketball athletes great! But please not a test& go get a bball athlete to do one and you'll see why& it takes an incredible amount of teaching technique for these skills, the strength and power gains are excellent. Example (ok n=1, and poor example, but an example non the less) I weight (give or take) 30 kgs less than a massive mate (great athlete) and I can hang power clean the same as him as I've been doing it for quite a few years, and I only taught him a month ago or so, but he has a bigger vert and can squat more. Why? Coordination is a huge factor.

When testing you should be after simple tests with no or little "learning effect" that are quick to administer. I'd rather do a vert for leg power and some sort of short repeat sprint for speed/speed end, and a 505 for ag, and yes a beep test for VO2. They will give you useable data specific to the athletes needs on the court.

Yes Pop is a great SC coach. I'll agree with you there ;)

I think you'll be fairly surprised when it comes to competencies of these guys as lifters. And for the matter of fact I am 100% confident these guys are continuously re-evaluated throughout upon these lifts. If somebody do not have a lifting background, that's when coaching comes in to develop an athlete for such thing. Why is this important? Better programming. Necessary to get 1RMs? No, but it depends on philosophy.

I think you'll also need to read closely at the term "evaluation". It is fairly different to "test".

As I mentioned before, for a field test Foran's test is used, Yo-yo up next. For physiological data (which is would be MVO2) there's no more accurate way than ergometer and once again MVO2 is not used as a comparison tool but simply for evaluation purposes (as my demonstration would have shown it's flaws as a mean for athlete comparison).

NSCA site? I've worked for 3 DivI colleges (one went into Final4 during my year there). Throughout my years a beep test has never been done to test for basketball. Perhaps in other sports but not basketball.

Believe it or not, one of the import I worked with last season claimed he's never done a beep test before arriving in Australia.

But you are correct to keep tests simple. 505 for agility? That's gridiron, lane agility is much better for basketball. When I was back also saw something new, Henry Test but I don't quite like it.

PS: please don't throw me that term "American etc"...I'm actually in Australia to checkout what's on offer here, and research here in this country is one of the leading places in the world. So don't make me sound like what you guys think of a "typical" American.

Just an extension of my thoughts on Austraian programs. AIS is actually unbelievable when it comes to research and has helped the world with some of their research and ideas. However, IMO where this country overall will need to improve on would be the actual application.

eg. since 2001, US have really went ahead to develop a better swimming program and majority of its resources have actually came from Australian research.

LA Boy,

Firstly I am educated in both American and Australian Uni Systems, and with associations for both, so was an attempt at a cheap laugh rather than a "typical" American slur. So no love lost there mate.

Second again the beep in in everything I've studied in terms of a field test has been show the most reliable and valid way of estimating VO2 (not measuring with a gas analyser, which I have done both cycling and running, very different results btw). Cycling is very different to running, it is a bit like the highest VO2 measures recorded I believe were (could be wrong) downhill skiing because you use whole body, as opposed to doing a VO2 max test on finger exercises you'll get a much lower value.

Watching even Pro basketball athletes lift cannot be even compared to a weightlifter (from the ones Ive seen), I liken it to watching an AFL pro who's never played basketball try and do a layup, with a bit of coaching you can get it close in a year to looking right, but it's still not as "clean". There is "learning" component so results will be skewed. So I'd prefer more simple tests such as a vertical for power.

The NSCA (National Strength and Conditioning Association) it is an American body, and many colleges these days require certification here to work as a S&C coach there (along with other things), guessing yours doesn't though as you haven't heard of it.

Ive used the lane drill and dont like it as I did some research on tests for basketball, and found this test has a higher SEM (repeat test error) than deemed "acceptable" as there is a learning effect (if I'm thinking of the same "lane drill") whereas the 505 gives much better prediction of an athletes ability to change direction without the error due to cognitive influences. Is this the lane drill where you stand in middle of key and touch each corner of the key and back to the middle between each corner?

Yes I would agree with your application re AUS athletes, maybe why our pros dont lift with as good a form and I fail to have the confidence of getting any useable data out of a C&J test for example.

I'm sorry about the NSCA, somehow my mind was on NCAA when reading (long hours work since been back). Personally some of us actually think the CSCS program has dropped in reputation in the last few years because now you have guys with an arts degree coming through and admitting not competent; but that's whole other discussion.

I think how competent an athlete become a lifter depends on the coaching. I have seen some pretty amazing lifts in the past with good techniques. One thing to keep in mind is, if the technique is not right, you'll DQ. I understand the concern behind the technique issue you have with less experienced lifters but for that exact same reason that's why we don't compare lifting results but refer to what you mentioned: VJ. Instead the result is used for "evaluation" purposes.

Also not sure about your program, but with the program we're introducing in Australia kids begin gym sessions with stabilization training at 15yo to prepare them for O-Lifts the following year. That year is fully technique focused. AT 17 they start real lifting for performance. Through this type of system I've seen some pretty good athletes/lifters been produced.

Lane agility- start at the corner of the lane, sprint to corner, slide to opposite corner, backpedal, slide to start corner and change direction.

Lane agility is actually used in NBA combine and by most colleges. It is probably the most basketball specific agility test I know.

Another thing might help your program out is, what we do with kids under 15yo, from 12~14 they typical do our other program where we teach these type of "SAQ" stuff. Through these years there's no reason they're not ready for whatever's ahead of them after HS.

For older athletes with less experience in lifting lots of time I'd suggest make sure they have proper arthrokinematics before the lifts are used. Many times those incompetencies are the reasons why they fail to deliver. And something else I've noticed with many coaches (both US and Aus) is the tendency of overcoaching, sometimes just let things go and come back after later sets will have a good result on the mental side of the athlete (athlete won't be so frustrated).

Wow arts degree doing it! perhaps just lift the result needed from 70 odd percent to 95 %, then see how the arty kids go! If you can't get 95 % of technique right I think your athletes are in trouble but that's another point as you said. but I more meant the journal section, generally you can get the coaches background there.

Yes you can get good lifting technique after a while but for a pro team that is constantly turning over players each year, getting enough stability in the lifts to actually use it as a test would be impossible I would assume, but I think we've agreed on that point use VJ...

I teach some kids basic lifting stuff, but unless they do it in their own time generally bball jrs don't lift in AUS unless they are involved in SASI / AIS etc type program, with older athletes it depends on where they are at as to where i start, but a lot of technique to start, broomsticks for the kiddies O lifts to start.

I'm still not convinced as to your lane drill, there is a lot of movements there which improvement could take place anywhere, you dont know where it's coming from... Have you done any test-retest error? I think you'll find it a lot higher than a 505 for eg. Hence why i dont do it. I believe you are better testing one thing at a time. What I do (haven't seen it done anywhere else, not to say it isn't done) is break it down to each movement, so I do a 505, then to bball specific do your slides by themselves rather than in with other movements like lane drill, so basically a lateral 505 without the 10 m "run up"... my opinion and from the data i find much less test-retest error.

SAQ explain? can't think of off top of my head (thanks in advance).

Yes I agree on "coaching by the averages" too, ie if the athlete lifts 10 good lifts and then 1 bad, then 10 good, (for eg, obviously not going to O/L a set of 21) then you probably don't need to say anything other than reminding them not to get sloppy. or overcoaching.

SAQ=Speed Agility Quickness

For the lane agility, depends on what equipment you get access. For us, we use timing gates setted up at each corner, so we can really breakdown the skills our athletes need to work on. Something else we have incorporated since mid-last year is video feedback which has worked great in helping athletes to identify biomechanical flaws. It is a very popular test in the states and from our perspective we're trying to get kids as ready as possible so once they go over, they know what to expect.

For a pure slide test at Phoenix we used Baseline Recovery (think Orlando and a few other teams use this one too). there are a few variations to this drill.

As far as junior kids don't lift? I absolutely hate it. We are now actually in contact with few high schools around Melbourne trying to develop strength programs in school. I think it's going to need to start from school not the club. There are a few kids over here heading to US next month with no lifting experience, that is absurd when they are supposedly some of the top kids around.

I remember Don Chu's response at this conference on whether young kids should do strength and plyometrics training: "the younger the better...". I think also a big part of why kids don't lift here also comes with the coach. Parents listen to the coach, most coaches here simply don't take it as a priority at a junior level and therefore the information don't cross the parent.

You would be lucky to find any sort of timing gates in any basketball club here I believe, even if i had them I'd prefer to measure each movement individually, as their would still be a "learning effect" in the drill, and one movement is preceded by another so I would assume there is still error. Have you done repeatability tests? I would love to see the results, if you have a good SEM/TEM for the test then great by all means I'll agree, but with our results (granted we used a stopwatch, but the error was higher than a 505, now for a longer time interval this can't be due to the stopwatch as the testers reaction time is less of a factor over a greater ammount of time). Hence why I prefer the breakdown.

I have personally spent time on biomechanics of the direction change in all directions, haven't gone to the extent of video feedback, but that's excellent that you do. The ammount of good athletes that still struggle to change direction effectively is amazing.

Yes I agree, I still think there is the common misconception around many parents that weightlifting is bad for juniors, something I regularly fight (including my own parents when talking about young relatives lifting, very uneducated "old school" response, slowly changing them, but that's another story).

I think a lot of clubs don't have any weightlifting facilities and can only just afford court hire/ dont have enough coaches with the expertise/ time to do this. Oh and most coaches (here anyway) just don't understand to be honest, not that their not passing anything on, (gross generalisation) I think they just have ball experience and that's it. So yes schools should jump on board.

I like a lot of Chu's work, voted for him at the last NSCA election. Side note if you say "we are going to do plyometrics" a lot of parents get scared and again have the misconception that it may be "unsafe" but if you say "we are going to run, jump and swing from monkey bars" then they are fine... The same parents will have a kid jump and land on a basketball court (give or take with 12 body weights of force) but wont let their kids squat in a controlled environment! makes no sense... I'm yet to meet a kid that can squat 12 times their body weight, or anyone for that matter.