HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Rink
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Rink For the not so ready for prime-time players, coaches, referees, and the people that have to live with them. Discuss experiences in local leagues, coaching tips, equipment, and training.

Leg Exersice

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-13-2008, 11:28 AM
  #26
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Okay, I'll go ahead and break with what seems to be the consensus on this board.

You should continue doing squats. In fact, you should buy this book: http://www.amazon.com/Starting-Stren...3914297&sr=8-1 and make sure you are doing them right, and lift heavy. You should be lifting the maximum amount that you can for a 5 rep set, and you should be increasing the weight every other day. Assuming that you are untrained in the movement, you should probably shoot to double the weight within 2 months.

Why? Squats will improve your leg strength for sure, but they will also do many many other things.

- Protect you from injury by strengthening your ligaments and muscles

- Vastly increase your core strength and balance

- Increase bone density. Again protecting you from injury

- Strenthen the erector muscles in the back, protecting the spine and providing incredibly useful support in game situations.

- Train your brain to do hard things, this is very helpful in competitive athletics.

I'm sure I will get flamed for this post, but the fact is that there are zero scientific studies showing that a properly executed weight training program, including heavy squats, deadlifts, bench presses, and standing presses pose outsize risks for young athletes. You stand a far greater chance of getting hurt actually playing hockey than you do hurting yourself lifting weights.

And unless you have an unusual medical condition, I would not consult a physician before starting the program. Did you consult a physician before starting to play hockey? Neither did I, and I see no reason to consult a physician here either.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 11:55 AM
  #27
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,963
vCash: 500
Don't consult with a doctor? He's a growing kid, it would be idiotic to not check with his doctor who knows a lot more about his body than you do... but I guess you know more than a doctor and he should listen to you.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 12:03 PM
  #28
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PruBlue25 View Post
Don't consult with a doctor? He's a growing kid, it would be idiotic to not check with his doctor who knows a lot more about his body than you do... but I guess you know more than a doctor and he should listen to you.
Why should he consult a doctor? I said in my post that if he has any unusual medical conditions that he should. Otherwise he's just a normal healthy kid, doing a normal, healthy activity. I fail to see where a doctor comes in.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 12:37 PM
  #29
czechmate25
Registered User
 
czechmate25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hershey, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,186
vCash: 500
Jagr did 1000 squats a day while he was growing up. 10 sets throughout the day of 100 reps.

Since you are 13, your bones aren't mature yet to handle heavy weight. Doing high reps using only your own body weight as resistance will not only increase your type 1A muscle fibers, but your chance on injury is decreased. Young players who start lifting heavy weights before their body is ready are just setting themselves up for injuries.

I agree with the poster who suggested the plyometric training....IMO, it really is the best form of training for a young hockey player. In a few years after your body starts to develop more, then you can start lifting with heavier weight in the off season.

czechmate25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 01:08 PM
  #30
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack View Post
Why should he consult a doctor? I said in my post that if he has any unusual medical conditions that he should. Otherwise he's just a normal healthy kid, doing a normal, healthy activity. I fail to see where a doctor comes in.
A doctor will tell him if there is a threat to his development and what kind of weight lifting activities he could take part in and to what effect while you are just saying go ahead and do it and go as heavy as you can.

If I were him, I'd rather listen to someone who went through years of medical school and someone who has medical records from when he was a baby and knows him and his body (at that age he's still going to a pediatrician), rather than some random guy over the internet.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 06:40 PM
  #31
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PruBlue25 View Post
A doctor will tell him if there is a threat to his development and what kind of weight lifting activities he could take part in and to what effect while you are just saying go ahead and do it and go as heavy as you can.

If I were him, I'd rather listen to someone who went through years of medical school and someone who has medical records from when he was a baby and knows him and his body (at that age he's still going to a pediatrician), rather than some random guy over the internet.
Threat to his development? As what, a hockey player? Now the doctor is an expert on sports training?

Across the country high school football players weight train to improve their abilities, should they all be consulting their doctors as well?

I really don't see how we can continue this argument unless you tell what risks a healthy, normal, 13 year old faces by lifting weights in a safe, properly supervised environment.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 07:49 PM
  #32
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack View Post
Threat to his development? As what, a hockey player? Now the doctor is an expert on sports training?

Across the country high school football players weight train to improve their abilities, should they all be consulting their doctors as well?

I really don't see how we can continue this argument unless you tell what risks a healthy, normal, 13 year old faces by lifting weights in a safe, properly supervised environment.
http://life.familyeducation.com/spor...ety/42241.html
Advice from a real, live doctor. Basically, light weights like ankle weights and such are fine, heavy lifting most definitely is not. Like every other poster on this board has been saying.

Also, a doctor has a MD degree. A trainer does not. That's the difference and that's why I trust a doctor a lot more.

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 08:19 PM
  #33
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
http://life.familyeducation.com/spor...ety/42241.html
Advice from a real, live doctor. Basically, light weights like ankle weights and such are fine, heavy lifting most definitely is not. Like every other poster on this board has been saying.

Also, a doctor has a MD degree. A trainer does not. That's the difference and that's why I trust a doctor a lot more.
Thanks, that's a great example of why you shouldn't ask a doctor about weight training.

From Wikipedia (my bold for emphasis):

Orthopaedic specialists used to recommend that children avoid weight training because the growth plates on their bones might be at risk. The very rare reports of growth plate fractures in children who trained with weights occurred as a result of inadequate supervision, improper form or excess weight, and there have been no reports of injuries to growth plates in youth training programs that followed established guidelines. The position of the National Strength and Conditioning Association is that strength training is safe for children if properly designed and supervised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strengt...ite_note-KH-33

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 08:41 PM
  #34
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack View Post
Thanks, that's a great example of why you shouldn't ask a doctor about weight training.

From Wikipedia (my bold for emphasis):

Orthopaedic specialists used to recommend that children avoid weight training because the growth plates on their bones might be at risk. The very rare reports of growth plate fractures in children who trained with weights occurred as a result of inadequate supervision, improper form or excess weight, and there have been no reports of injuries to growth plates in youth training programs that followed established guidelines. The position of the National Strength and Conditioning Association is that strength training is safe for children if properly designed and supervised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strengt...ite_note-KH-33
Interesting, the people who make money when you train say it's okay...
I'll say it again. Trainers do not have medical degrees. Doctors do. You're also taking the word of wikipedia over that of somebody with an advanced degree in understanding the human body.

Get an MD, then I'll believe you. Fair?

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 09:27 PM
  #35
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
Interesting, the people who make money when you train say it's okay...
I'll say it again. Trainers do not have medical degrees. Doctors do. You're also taking the word of wikipedia over that of somebody with an advanced degree in understanding the human body.

Get an MD, then I'll believe you. Fair?
Here's a study published in 1987 in the American Journal of Sports Medicine:

http://ajs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/5/483

Abstract:

Results showed that in the short term, supervised concentric strength training results in a low injury rate and does not adversely affect bone, muscle, or epi physes ; nor does it adversely affect growth, development, flexibility, or motor performance. As the safety question is multifaceted, this should not lead to the conclusion that strength training for prepubescents is uniformly safe. Further research is needed.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 09:59 PM
  #36
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
So you can quote a non-conclusive study? Great. Even in that abstract it takes the position that it can't be declared safe yet because there's not enough data to say it is.

The thing is the short term study versus long term. The entire concern is about long term bone and joint development, not short term injuries.

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2008, 10:09 PM
  #37
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
So you can quote a non-conclusive study? Great. Even in that abstract it takes the position that it can't be declared safe yet because there's not enough data to say it is.

The thing is the short term study versus long term. The entire concern is about long term bone and joint development, not short term injuries.
Yes; sure. Waiting patiently for your link to a study, Long term or short, conclusive or inconclusive, that suggests that a properly designed and supervised strength training program is risky for young athletes.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 10:01 AM
  #38
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
Here's a study published in 1987 in the American Journal of Sports Medicine:

http://ajs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/5/483

Abstract:

Results showed that in the short term, supervised concentric strength training results in a low injury rate and does not adversely affect bone, muscle, or epi physes ; nor does it adversely affect growth, development, flexibility, or motor performance. As the safety question is multifaceted, this should not lead to the conclusion that strength training for prepubescents is uniformly safe. Further research is needed.


Do you even read what you post? Enough. If you go against the established medical body the burden of proof is upon you. You have not demonstrated it. In any court of law or formal debate, that means you loose.

This principle is why Einstein didn't just say, 'my theory is right, prove to me Newton's is better'. the burden of proof was upon him, he had to show that his theories were better.

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 03:31 PM
  #39
BogsDiamond
Anybody get 2 U yet?
 
BogsDiamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack View Post
The position of the National Strength and Conditioning Association is that strength training is safe for children if properly designed and supervised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strengt...ite_note-KH-33
So who's going to supervise him?
I don't know his dad but I'd bet he's not a certified trainer.
And 99% of the trainers in gyms don't know anything. I've heard some of the absolute worse advice from men and woman with multiple certifications and degrees.

At 13, there's no need for weight training. Plyometrics, or using his body weight are good enough.

Maybe if he's rich he can hire a personal trainer like Crosby did at 13 or Stamkos did at 15.

But lots of kids have made it to the NHL or higher levels without touching a weight at the tender age of 13.
There's a great number of ways to increase explosiveness without jeopardizing his health.

BogsDiamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 06:22 PM
  #40
Wooty
Registered User
 
Wooty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Harbor City, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,027
vCash: 500
it would seem to me that playing competitive ice hockey is more dangerous then lifting weights. Lifting weights should make a hockey player safer in the long run

Wooty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 06:45 PM
  #41
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkd88 View Post
it would seem to me that playing competitive ice hockey is more dangerous then lifting weights. Lifting weights should make a hockey player safer in the long run
See above on medical opinion versus common person opinion.

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 07:16 PM
  #42
Wooty
Registered User
 
Wooty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Harbor City, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
See above on medical opinion versus common person opinion.
You are too wrapped up in "debating"
You ignore the entire portion that goes against everything you are saying. Oh hey lets highlight one tiny part that agrees with me!

Wooty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 07:21 PM
  #43
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
Here's a study published in 1987 in the American Journal of Sports Medicine:

http://ajs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/5/483

Abstract:

Results showed that in the short term, supervised concentric strength training results in a low injury rate and does not adversely affect bone, muscle, or epi physes ; nor does it adversely affect growth, development, flexibility, or motor performance. As the safety question is multifaceted, this should not lead to the conclusion that strength training for prepubescents is uniformly safe. Further research is needed.


Do you even read what you post? Enough. If you go against the established medical body the burden of proof is upon you. You have not demonstrated it. In any court of law or formal debate, that means you loose.
Okay, first of all, relax. I don't know if you have some kind of "steak" in this, but this isn't about winning or "loose"ing. The study said that it couldn't conclude that lifting is "uniformly safe". That's a rediculous burden of proof. Playing hockey is not "uniformly safe". The fact that the study showed no short term harmful effects bone, muscle, growth, development, flexibility, or motor performance is pretty remarkable.

And please provide evidence before you go claiming that I'm 'going against the established medical body'. All you did was quote some random pediatrician who obviously has no experience or expertise in weight training. That holds no water for me, even if she has a couple of letters after her name.

Quote:
This principle is why Einstein didn't just say, 'my theory is right, prove to me Newton's is better'. the burden of proof was upon him, he had to show that his theories were better.
And Newton had to prove his theories first. But who am I kidding, you won't adjust your attitude or provide new evidence to back up your position. You'll continue whining about how I'm not a doctor so I don't know what I'm talking about, or you'll pull up some more misleading advice from individuals with no experience in weight training.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 07:33 PM
  #44
MikeD
Registered User
 
MikeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,066
vCash: 500
PLaying hockey is inherantly more risky but does not have the potential life threatening risk of doing so with an undiagnosed condition. We read about them in the paper every year. Even diagnosed, the risk is evident as shown by the recent situation with Alexei Cherepanov. This should be every parents nightmare and enough motivation to seek competent medical opinion prior to starting any extensive and exhaustive conditioning program!


Weight training prior to the onset of puberty has VERY limited benefit. Low testosterone levels severely limit muscle development. It also has a tendency to reduce the elasticity of those pre-puberty muscles. This tends to reduce the explosive speed, hip joint flexion and extension for the left/right side, increase the risk of injury in the 10-13 age bracket. This loss was mitigated in the second group which incorporated a stretch routine with the strength training.

Onset of puberty begins a young boys ability to benefit from Weight training. For Decades the opinion was that weight training should be limited to those who have advanced well beyond the onset stage. The hypothesis was that it would harm development. Unsupervised and in over training situations the negatives far exceeded any positive benefit.

It has been shown (Athanasios Zakas PhD : Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, November 2001) that the negatives associated with prepubescent weight training are mitigated with a stretch routine.

Why consult with a doctor? To assure that there are no undiagnosed physiological problems that would be exacerbated by beginning a strength training/phisical conditioning routine. It is not uncommon for cardio-pulminary issues go undiagnosed. There are a host of issues that can catch one by surprise at any age group. You would be a FOOL to start an extensive training regimen with out consulting your physician and as a parent you would be negligent if you didnt do so on behalf of your child.

These studies being quoted....PLEASE do a bit better. Find something in THIS DECADE! here is a clue.......CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE. Not going to give you the date but in any case your both correct in some aspects and your both DEAD WRONG in others. Each has half truths which are no better than lies and are relying on OUTDATED data.

** better yet, instead of derailing a decent thread and preventing the poster from getting the answers looked for...take your squabble to PM.


Last edited by MikeD: 10-14-2008 at 07:49 PM.
MikeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 07:51 PM
  #45
Blackjack
Registered User
 
Blackjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: keyjhboardd +bro]ke
Posts: 6,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DolemitesP1mpHand View Post
So who's going to supervise him?
I don't know his dad but I'd bet he's not a certified trainer.
And 99% of the trainers in gyms don't know anything. I've heard some of the absolute worse advice from men and woman with multiple certifications and degrees.
So why are are you concerned that his dad's not a trainer? I agree by the way. Most trainers will do more harm than good.

Quote:
At 13, there's no need for weight training. Plyometrics, or using his body weight are good enough.

Maybe if he's rich he can hire a personal trainer like Crosby did at 13 or Stamkos did at 15.

But lots of kids have made it to the NHL or higher levels without touching a weight at the tender age of 13.
There's a great number of ways to increase explosiveness without jeopardizing his health.
Yeah, he could hire a trainer. Maybe he is rich, I don't know. But the book I linked to is co-authored by a kinesiologist and describes correct form in depth. And if you're still not sure you can post a video online and the author will critique your technique for free. There is absolutely no reason that him an his father couldn't use these resources to strength train effectively and safely.

As for the success of kids that don't weight train, you're obviously grasping there, but I'll address it anyway. Ice hockey is sport that emphasizes skill and skating technique. You can have strength in spades and you will still get waxed by better skaters. Strength training is no substitute for skill development, and highly skilled players can succeed professionally without doing much in the way of strength training or conditioning. But all other things being equal, the stronger player is always the better player.

Blackjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 07:59 PM
  #46
cptjeff
[insert joke here]
 
cptjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC.
Country: United States
Posts: 9,673
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack View Post
Okay, first of all, relax. I don't know if you have some kind of "steak" in this, but this isn't about winning or "loose"ing. The study said that it couldn't conclude that lifting is "uniformly safe". That's a rediculous burden of proof. Playing hockey is not "uniformly safe". The fact that the study showed no short term harmful effects bone, muscle, growth, development, flexibility, or motor performance is pretty remarkable.

And please provide evidence before you go claiming that I'm 'going against the established medical body'. All you did was quote some random pediatrician who obviously has no experience or expertise in weight training. That holds no water for me, even if she has a couple of letters after her name.



And Newton had to prove his theories first. But who am I kidding, you won't adjust your attitude or provide new evidence to back up your position. You'll continue whining about how I'm not a doctor so I don't know what I'm talking about, or you'll pull up some more misleading advice from individuals with no experience in weight training.
The burden of proof is not going to be that it's uniformly safe- it's that it will not cause significant bone and joint damage in the future. Uniformly safe is impossible for anything.

Somebody with a couple of letters after her name? The thing is, those letters represent 4 years undergrad, usually in biology or pre-med, 4 years of medical school, and 2 years in residency. That's 10 years of school and practical experience in the field of the human body. to put that in perspective, that's 10 years. A education up to the high school level takes 13 years counting kindergarten. That high school degree is all you really need to become a athletic trainer, but the better ones have a sports medicine degree. That's typically a 4 year program, though some community colleges have it as a 2 year program. We'll average it at 3.

16 years of education, 3 of it specific to the field. Somebody with those measly letters by their name has 23 years of education with 10 specific to the field. That study you cited? over half were MDs.

Oh, and another study that cites the study you cited, and liked to on the same site:
Quote:
Musculoskeletal Injuries
Caused by Weight Training Guidelines for Prevention
William L. Risser, MD

Professor of Pediatrics, University of Texas Medical School-Houston, 6655 Travis Street, Suite 570, Houston, TX 77030

Tens of thousands of U.S. children, adolescents, and young adults are using weights either recreationally, to train for sports, or to compete in weight lifting, power lifting, or body building contests. Weight use may cause significant musculoskeletal injury. This review summarizes for the clinician the best available information on injury risks and prevention.
Unfortunately, the site is acting up so I can't get the whole article right now, but here's a portion from an article written for a wider audience by the same person that I found elsewhere:
Quote:
No data are available to answer the question of how old an athlete should be before lifting maximal amounts of weight during weight training or competition. Until such information is available, the American Academy of Pediatrics [18] has recommended that adolescents wait at least until they have reached Tanner stage V of development. Even after this stage, using weights remains a potentially dangerous activity.

Safety is a particularly important issue for prepubescent athletes. It has been recommended that young athletes train with low loads using high numbers of repetitions, with good supervision, and that they avoid competitive lifting. [10-20] Experts also recommend that weight training be only a relatively small part of a well-balanced activity program.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._11730096/pg_2

So lifting may be okay, but only as a small part of a workout regime and lifting heavy, as you suggest, is a big no-no.

By the way, Tanner V usually happens around 14. So minimal lifting at that point and none recommended before that.
This thread is about a 13 year old. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, pretty much the ultimate word on any medical issues relating to children and teens, that means no heavy lifting.

cptjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2008, 08:08 PM
  #47
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,963
vCash: 500
I would think that most professional players truly begin strength training when they are around 15/16 yrs old and then really hit it hard around their draft age. This is why you see many players who get drafted at a low weight and then jet up quick. Also around the ages of 20-22 most people tend to fill out a lot more and will gain a substantial amount of weight in which if keeping active and doing strength training will be mostly muscle.

I know that between the age of 20 to now (22 now) I've gained 20 pounds and yet I look thinner than when I was 150 pounds. During that time I can't say that I've done hardcore weight lifting. Here and there, but mostly cardio and hockey.

Anyway, the argument that hockey is more dangerous is irrelevant. The danger in hockey comes more from physical harm (concussions, broken bones, etc.). It's always best to consult with a doctor, especially if the kid is going full force into hockey. You don't want to find out 5 years down the road that you have some life threatening condition (which goes away from the whole bones development thing, but I think this issue is even more important).

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2008, 10:37 AM
  #48
jaywills1020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rang3rsfan30 View Post
So I recently started playing hockey, Iím 13 . My coach and my dad say I need to get a lot faster and work on my legs. I have been doing squats for like one and a half weeks. About 30 a day, yeah I know not a lot. What other exercise are helpful for the thighs or Calves. Thanks.

BTW, I play defense.
at your age i wouldnt worry too much about it. if your doing squats i assume your in some kind of gym. see if they have a stair master, throw on a weighted vest or fill a school bag with some weights and hop on the stair master.

jaywills1020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.