When observing current trends domestically and globally regarding the planning of athletic training for athletes; two major schools of work philosophy can be identified.
- The muscular and cardiovascular (endurance) perspective as the key to athletic results in sport, which is expressed in work on specific muscles related to the ball sport, usually in a weight room with barbells or bodyweight, and sometimes while performing conversions and training with intentional instability of some kind.
- The “specificity” perspective as the key to results, which sometimes rejects approach number 1 with the argument that “Yossi Benayoun did not train according to method number 1 and neither should you”; in this perspective there will be a lot of field time, a lot of free running, and it will usually be characterized by the unification of fitness components with ball work.
In this article, we will expand on the two different approaches, learn the advantages and disadvantages of the work methods, and ask whether there is room for a third method, and if so, what is it?
