The Strength House

Call Directions Website Contact the business

The Strength House Follow along as we continually work to evolve our training process to best serve our athletes.

Zero points for brevity.
10/18/2026

Zero points for brevity.

10 Years ❤️ Taryn Robins
10/14/2026

10 Years ❤️ Taryn Robins

Same athlete. Same environment. Same task…with one difference.This is a pretty clean example of a task constraint manipu...
09/25/2026

Same athlete. Same environment. Same task…with one difference.

This is a pretty clean example of a task constraint manipulation within Newell’s model.

Same external load at 6 lb. The only thing we changed was the physical dimensions of the implement.

But the solution changes.

There are differences in the lead hip position at FFC, how the front side is able to impose IR on top of ER, when and where the impulse arrives at the ball, and how he is leveraging connective tissue behavior…or not.

Does he need to move out to find space, or in?

The geometry of the ball changes joint configurations, along with internal fluid and pressure dynamics.

Same load. Different task constraint. Different solution.

I won’t say one is inherently better than the other. That can be debated. I use this simply to show that they are not the same.

And if there’s something specific you’re intending to influence, understanding structural bias and how that can be leveraged vs. discarded can turn seemingly small decisions into differences that compound.

For or against your intended outcomes, mind you.

09/24/2026

1. Yerkes & Dodson (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18(5), 459–482.
Apply: Decide if each block is high-arousal (sprints, jumps) or low-arousal (skill work, technical lifts), and set the environment to match.

2. Hanin (2000). Emotions in Sport. Human Kinetics.
Apply: Ask each athlete if they perform best amped or calm, and let them adjust their own prep.

3. Terry, Karageorghis et al. (2020). Effects of music in exercise and sport: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 146(2), 91–117.
Apply: Use separate playlists for power work, general lifting, and cooldown.

4. Triplett (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of Psychology, 9(4), 507–533.
Apply: Pair athletes or score one power drill (jump height, med ball velocity) and post the results.

5. Wulf (2013). Attentional focus and motor learning: A review of 15 years. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 6(1), 77–104.
Apply: Swap one internal cue for an external one: “extend your hips” → “push the floor away.”

6. Ariel & Saville (1972). Anabolic steroids: The physiological effects of placebos. Medicine and Science in Sports, 4(2), 124–126.
Beedie et al. (2006). Placebo effects of caffeine on cycling performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 38(12), 2159–2164.
Apply: Tell athletes what a drill is for and what it should feel like before they do it.

7. Godden & Baddeley (1975). Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater. British Journal of Psychology, 66(3), 325–331.
Apply: Finish skill work in game-like conditions (count, noise, someone watching), not only in a quiet, blocked setting.

In the past year I have been exposed to more examples of mound force plate data, alongside typical force plate jump data...
09/21/2026

In the past year I have been exposed to more examples of mound force plate data, alongside typical force plate jump data. This is a broad attempt to organize my thoughts on applying archetypes such as narrow vs. wide, propulsive phases in the delivery / CMJ, and the collected data into something useful. There is a lot of published research on mound force data, and a lot on countermovement jump testing, and this is meant to help connect the two in a way a coach can actually act on.

I worked from my own experience and application alongside what the evidence supports. The paper marks where my application goes past the evidence, and shows how I use both when I assess a pitcher.

It is a framework for interpretation, not a validated algorithm. I believe I am clear throughout about which parts are which.

Comment FORCE and I’ll send the PDF.

3 or 4 years ago, Bill Hartman recommended I read “Thinking In Bets”. It was very influential for me. I have probably gi...
09/08/2026

3 or 4 years ago, Bill Hartman recommended I read “Thinking In Bets”. It was very influential for me. I have probably gifted over 20 copies of it since. Bill often says: “What information do you need to make the first decision?”

Ex. An athlete walks in with 15+ things I could assess. It’s not about how much can I collect - that’s pedestal-building.

You don’t need to completely understand the athlete before acting. You need enough information to identify the next consequential choice. Then you act, and the athlete’s response generates new information.

Information-Decision-Action-New information-Next decision
Rather than:
Collect everything-construct comprehensive explanation-finally act.

Quit helped me see that it’s not just info for first decision. It’s aLeo information needed to make a different decision.
I think those belong together.

What do I need to know to place the bet?
What do I need to see to update the bet?

Say you’re looking at a pitcher and think proximal tibial rotation is limiting something downstream.

The first decision. Not the answer. That’s a massive distinction.

You don’t have to know where the entire process ends to make a high-quality next decision.

You see A. A gives you reason to test B. B changes when you alter C. That response makes D more or less likely. Now you know what to do next. You didn’t need D when you started.

Decisions are made with incomplete information. Waiting for certainty has a cost too.

An assessment isn’t primarily an exercise in collecting information about an athlete. It’s an exercise in reducing the uncertainty necessary to make the next decision.

Don’t collect information to know more. Collect the information necessary to make the next decision, and make sure the decision produces information that helps you make the one after it.

09/03/2026

“You can’t fire a cannon off a canoe.”

Ya, we get it.

But actually, you can.

“Ya, but it’s unstable.”

No. You can literally fire it every time…off a canoe.

“Ya, but you don’t know where it’s going. That’s the point.”

Oh. So you can’t accurately fire a cannon at a target off a canoe.

“Sure. Ya. Because it’s unstable.”

It’s unpredictable.

“Same thing.”

No. It’s not the same thing.

The task got completed. That tells us a solution existed.

It tells us nothing about the solution, what it cost, or what becomes possible next.

That’s part of my problem with “stability.”

I revisited this topic after a great discussion with my friend Taylor Burns Taylor Burns. During it, I was reminded of s...
09/01/2026

I revisited this topic after a great discussion with my friend Taylor Burns Taylor Burns. During it, I was reminded of something Joe Maddon has talked about: empowerment over control. I’ve gathered a lot from listening to Joe speak, and Taylor and I are always having insightful conversations.

Hindsight is 20/20. I’m no longer running a staff. This was always my intent, and I think I got better at it as the years went by. I wasn’t perfect, and neither is this take.

I’m proud of the people who worked with me and for our facility, and of what they’ve gone on to do. I don’t take credit for that. I’m proud of them for identifying with the process and sticking to it.

Address

256 Ayer Road
Harvard, MA
01605

Telephone

+19788462882

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when The Strength House posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to The Strength House:

Shortcuts

Share

Category