Jack Blatherwick

Skating improvement off-ice

By Jack Blatherwick

Let’s Play Hockey Columnist

Four world-class skaters (Kyle Okposo, Natalie Darwitz, Andrew Alberts, Troy Riddle) demonstrate dryland training concepts that are sure to improve skating technique and quickness. The difference between an elite skater and a beginner who runs around the ice stiff-legged, is very clear in these two photos.


Basic skating “Load-Up-Position”: Prior to every powerful extension, good skaters first “Load Up” their weight on one leg. If there is inadequate knee bend, the stride is shortened and less explosive, so every off-ice repetition should position the upper leg parallel to the ground. 

Michael Crowe, the U.S. Junior Speedskating coach warned, “Teaching youngsters to skate without practicing the ‘Load-Up-Position’ off-ice is a guarantee that bad habits will have to be corrected in coming years.”

Just getting into a good deep “Load-Up Position” hundreds of times is, in itself, good skating practice. It improves dynamic balance and uses core muscles that stabilize the hip joint. Lunges (shown below left) can be done by stepping forward, sideways, at 45° and backwards.

To strengthen larger skating muscles, Natalie (below right) is using a 60-pound plyotube (sand bag). Other exercises from this same position, like one-legged squats, dip squats, step-ups, slide board, Russian Box and all kinds of one-legged jumps will develop balance and explosive one-legged strength.


Straight-Line-Extension: The most efficient skaters extend their entire body in a straight line when they push off, because this generates force through the center of gravity. Bending at the waist into a pike position is wasting force, so be sure to optimize your training efforts by forming correct habits of “Straight-Line-Extension.”


Sprinting: Improving acceleration in a short sprint (10-30 yards) is a sure way to improve acceleration on the ice. You won’t hear this advice from many sources, because they can’t make money on it. One of the best sprint workouts is to start from a good two-legged squat position – facing sideways at about 45° to the direction you’ll sprint – then explode for 10-20  yards, trying to get your entire body into “Straight-Line-Extension” as quickly as possible. Repeat facing the other way. Rest. Then continue with 100 percent effort and plenty of rest. Uphill sprints are excellent as well.

Invest: Your future in hockey depends to some extent on how quickly you skate with good balance, agility and posture.  On-ice repetition of sound fundamentals works synergistically with intelligent off-ice training, but one without the other is a distant second-best. Investing hours – and then years – in these basic concepts is money in the bank.





Planning for offseason improvement

By Jack Blatherwick

Let’s Play Hockey Columnist

The best way to start an effective offseason training program is to sit down with your hockey coach and make a good plan, outlining your own specific goals. No matter how hard you work, training without a good plan would mean a high probability of failure.

This plan might be miles from what is recommended if you first visit a personal fitness instructor, a strength coach or a book. Why? Because they all have personal biases and money to make on their products. After 30 years of research I have my own biases, of course. I think every young player should train for the skills and athleticism of Pavel Datsyuk and Scott Niedermayer.

After you’ve set your own goals — only then you might visit with an expert in some particular area. If you’ve decided to improve skating or leg strength, overall strength, shooting or stickhandling, it might be helpful to work with someone who can assist you. 

If you don’t have video, study photos of Datsyuk and Niedermayer. Ask your coach how you can become more like them. The younger you are the more your training plan should be tailored toward those models.

As I speak to coaches around the country, I often ask them to list the qualities that are most important to develop at young ages. Or if it’s college coaches, “What qualities are you looking for in your recruits?”

Mental qualities include rink sense (read-react abilities), poise, toughness, creativity and so on. Physical skills include skating, stickhandling, shooting, passing/receiving and multi-tasking. Finally, ‘hockey athleticism’ includes (by the coaches’ priorities) quickness, agility, speed, explosive strength in the legs, coordination, overall strength and endurance.

Consider this illogical situation: Many college coaches recruit players based on the qualities above, yet when it comes to advice about offseason training, they say, “Go see Joe in the weight room. Lift hard. I don’t know what you’re doing — just work hard. I’ll see you in September.” 

I wonder why they don’t include a training manual to work on Datsyuk/Niedermayer skills. Those are the qualities that separate winning college teams from the also-rans. But no, it’s simply, “Go work hard in the weight room.”

College athletes should work hard in the weight room, of course, but they should also work hard on hockey skills plus quickness, speed and agility. And since this can be done in a way that improves core strength, endurance, dynamic balance and coordination, the former should be your priorities.

It is even more important for younger players to emphasize Datsyuk/Niedermayer qualities, because the windows of opportunity for developing skills, athleticism and rink sense — are most advantageous at younger ages. Explosive leg strength — emphasizing one leg at a time — good knee bend on every dryland exercise and maximal jumping ability will help form correct skating habits at a young age.

The other avenue of improvement for quickness is to do short sprints, mostly on a flat surface, but sometimes uphill, and occasionally down a slight hill. Every team we’ve tested in 30 years — youth levels through top professionals — has a highly significant relationship between short sprint speed and acceleration on the ice.

Finally, to improve multi-tasking abilities, it is a good idea to use a hockey stick sometimes while training your legs. But the best way to work on multi-tasking is to play active sports like football, lacrosse, soccer, track, tennis and basketball. Quickness, agility and skill training are most important in these sports also, and training for them can also improve endurance. So hopefully, coaches won’t be wasting your time with a five mile jog. 


Visit Jack’s website at www.overspeed.info.




Skillful defensemen are catalysts

By Jack Blatherwick

Let’s Play Hockey Columnist

“How do you identify those rare great defensemen? Once they touch the puck in the defensive zone, the next thing you know, we’re on the attack at the offensive blue line.” Glen Sonmor was on a roll, emphasizing this point to his Minnesota North Star coaching/scouting staff 30 years ago. His lifelong motto as a scout was, “I don’t care what he can’t do; I want to know what special things he can do that others can’t. If we’re any good as coaches, we should be able to develop the rest.”

Besides playing professionally, Sonmor has been a coach, general manager and scout for 50 years. His experience — like that of anyone who has coached — is that the most difficult skill for any team is breaking the puck out of the zone in a way that starts an effective offensive rush. It requires great rink sense, skill, courage and toughness — poise on the part of defensemen to initiate the breakout in the midst of tenacious forechecking.

Those few defensemen who can do it are the envy of opposing coaches at every level of hockey. Scott Niedermeyer, captain of the Canadian team, was a great example in the Olympics, and after watching the final game several times, it’s easy to argue that he was the MVP for the Gold Medal team.

The ability to step up across the goal line and make passes while moving north (toward the opposing goal) means that all forwards will be moving through the neutral zone at top speed. This creates a four-man rush that puts great pressure on the opponent, even if they’re in good position.

On the other hand, if a defenseman simply rings the puck around the boards from behind the net, the wing must wait for it to arrive at the same time as the physical assault from two opponents. If the wing is courageous, conscientious and skillful, he might be able to chip the puck into the neutral zone, where his two linemates will support and pick it up along the boards. The ensuing rush is impotent.

This is one reason we see so much dumping of the puck, rather than play-making. Most defensemen are simply not good enough to make breakout plays that enhance the attack. It’s actually just a matter of two or three strides, and a lot of skill, for the D to make the breakout pass after stepping up across the goal line.

The most common breakout play is a distant second-best. This is practiced thousands of times by most teams: the defenseman skates behind the net and before turning up ice, passes directly to the stick of the stationary wing at the half-board. The wing will probably not have to deal with the opposing D pinching down the boards and his next pass is easier than if the D had rung it around the boards, but the winger is stationary and will not get up in the rush quickly enough to contribute much to the attack. The result is a two-man rush against three opponents.

Niedermeyer makes every forward on his team a better player, because they receive passes while moving north at top speed. Of course, every winning team has defensemen who contribute other things: toughness in the corners or in front of the net, shot blocking, steady, smart defense — qualities that make it ugly for opposing forwards.

But the 2010 Olympic message to youth coaches is this: cultivate those Niedermeyer qualities in young defensemen. Look for your smartest, most skillful players who don’t score four goals a game, and make them into defensemen in Niedermeyer’s mold. Size is irrelevant in comparison to stickhandling skills, poise and rink sense.

All defensemen must compete to prevent goals like their very lives depend on it. They must anticipate dangerous situations, make good reads, cover effectively and stop rushes. They must be miserable to play against when competing for loose pucks. But, in addition, the greatest D are those with the rare special ability to make their forwards better. By the way they break out of the zone, they are the catalysts that championships are made of.


Visit Jack’s website at www.overspeed.info.




You can’t have it both ways

By Jack Blatherwick

Let’s Play Hockey Columnist

Highly skilled, young superstars like Patrick Kane have changed the face of the NHL. He was the first pick in the 2007 Draft, but simply because he lacks size, he might not have been drafted at all if he were eligible four years earlier.

During the lockout year (2004), the NHL decided to feature hockey’s unique, intrinsic skills, so they told referees to dust off their rule books and call the game the way it is written. They are judged — not by how many coaches are happy with their work — but by video replays and grading systems based objectively on how they enforce the rules.

There are many other young superstars in the league — too many to name here — but Kane has become a rock star in Chicago while the Blackhawks vaulted from the bottom to the top of the league. Of course, his teammates, like Hawks captain Jonathan Toews, and the entire roster all share in the team’s success. But because Kane is one of the smaller players, his success illustrates what an impact there is on the game when the officials protect the rules.

Offensive and defensive skills — not stick penalties — dominate games in the NHL and the Olympics. But the college game is still plagued by defensive tactics which depend on hooking, holding, slashing and interference.

It has not been easy for the NHL to make this transition, because one team or the other will always be unhappy when a call is made that would not have been made seven years ago. It will not be easy to stay this course — and harder yet to convince leaders at other levels of hockey to interpret the rules as they are written.

Watching an NHL game recently, I heard the analyst say, “The referees are calling it too close. They should put the whistle in their pockets, and let the players decide the outcome.”

Then, within a few seconds a forward was tripped as he tried to split the D. The refs let it go, and the same analyst said, “You have to call that one.”

This is the kind of hockey double-speak that makes it difficult for referees to protect the rules. Well-meaning coaches, players and fans would like refs to do all of the following: “Call the same number of penalties on both teams. Have some feel; put the whistle away late in the game. Let the players decide the game. Don’t call it so close…but hey, you’ve got to call that one.”

Right now, the NHL has the right formula most the time: Every stick penalty and interference is called exactly as it is written. The ref doesn’t have to ask — as in other levels of hockey, “Is that hook really a hook? Does it really make a difference in the outcome? Did I call the last penalty on team A or B? How much time is left?”

It’s more subjective to call infractions of body checking, because hockey is a tough, physical sport. I heard that some youth districts have come up with a ridiculous neo-rule that if a player is hurt from a body check, even if it is a legal hit, the checker is suspended.

Sorry. If your child is going to play hockey, there is a chance of injuries, and the only protection is from the rule book. This is precisely why we must empower the referees to enforce the rule book without our own biased double-speak.

All officials are professionals — they care about the game and about the safety of players. Some are better than others, and they all make mistakes. But the worst thing we can do is to assign them the impossible task of satisfying coaches. I know from 45 years of my own irrational behavior, coaches are only satisfied when everything goes their way.

You can’t have it both ways in hockey: Protecting the skills and satisfying the biases of everyone who has a thought on the subject. Those who have a personal bias have the right to lobby to change the rules, but in the meantime referees must officiate by the letter of the rulebook.


Visit Jack’s website at www.overspeed.info.




What makes a miracle a miracle?

By Jack Blatherwick

Let’s Play Hockey Columnist

We call it a miracle – those pyramids in Egypt – or the first step on the moon – or whenever an American team pulls off a major upset in Olympic hockey. I wonder if the participants really believe their work “defies all known laws of science?”

I traveled back 4,600 years to a typical day on the job, just to see what the Egyptian workers were saying about miracles. There were 20,000 or so, and some had permanently twisted anatomies, because they had been hauling rocks for most of the 80 years it took to complete the project.

There was some grumbling we can’t repeat when I asked if this should be called “a miracle.” They had heard those rumors, and one of the group of 40 carrying a large boulder gasped, “As if someone just waves a bleeping wand and…voila…a pyramid!” 

These were the ‘carriers.’ There were also the higher paid ‘carvers’ and, of course, the educated-elite site managers who used long tight ropes to make sure the slant was up to the Pharaoh’s expectations. No twisted bodies in this group. They weren’t even sweating.

Hundreds of bakers made sure others had food to keep up the pace; physicians attended the injured; and in case carriers were crushed beneath a boulder, there were undertakers to ensure that bones, found thousands of years later, would be properly attired.

Astronauts at the Apollo 11 landing site had basically the same response as the Egyptians. As Neil Armstrong stepped down onto the moon, I asked, “Do you call this a miracle?” 

“What? Get back out of sight quick, before TV picks you up! Now we have to do this scene all over again. Stand over there behind the ship. (pause) One small step for a man; one giant leap for mankind. (pause) Ok, what were you talking about…miracle? A miracle defies all known laws of science. No way. This IS science. Thousands of intelligent people have been working as a team, 24/7 for this moment to happen. Don’t insult their efforts.”

“Sorry…maybe I’d better head back.  I think I’ll try the Olympic hockey team. They’ll be having their tryouts for the Games in Lake Placid in…uh…exactly 10 years.”  

“Well,” said Armstrong, “they have a tough test with those Soviets. Some have said it’s easier to land a man on the moon.”

July 1979, Colorado Springs: 90 of the best college hockey players are competing to make the Olympic team. Some, like John Harrington, knew the altitude (6,000 feet) would be a factor, so they moved out weeks in advance to accelerate their training.

“I’m leaving nothing to chance,” John said. “This is too important. I’ve been sprinting up hills, skating every hour available, lifting weights, shooting pucks and I’m in the best shape of my life. If someone beats me out, it’ll be a miracle.”

“Miracle? What are the chances of beating the Soviets?” I asked, but Harrington was already starting up Pike’s Peak and ignored the question. Most candidates came to tryouts in great shape. They knew that Coach Herb Brooks wanted speed on this team, and would test for it on the ice.

In the evening games, the evaluators were told to look for players who could compete at high speed because Brooks, having played with two Olympic teams and several national teams, knew the Soviets and Europeans played at a much faster tempo than college kids had ever seen.

When the team was picked, players were warned they’d be tested again on the ice, and that failing to prepare would mean they’d probably be cut when they returned for camp in a few weeks. This would be the major philosophy for the next seven months: Execute skills and make decisions at the highest possible tempo – repeat and repeat and repeat in practices of two hours or more – and, “You’d better not slow down…ever.”

There was much planning. Brooks’ over-riding philosophy was, “Always be better prepared than any of your athletes.” He noted that others had tried to beat the Soviets by simply emphasizing great defense. 

“You can’t be on defense all day against them,” he growled. “You’ll take penalties, and that’s it. Game over. You have to beat them at their own game – puck possession and speed. So how can you practice any other way? What good is a slow conditioning drill on-ice or off? We have to shock them when they realize that another team in the Olympics can operate at their pace.”

Sounds good, Herb, but I brought my recorder to some of your practices in the next months. Mark Pavelich was standing for a few seconds between shifts where his line flew up the ice and back – then up again – making decisions on the fly, trying to pass perfectly without hesitation, and doing this while skating faster than ever before. 

“Pav,” Brooks hollered. “You look like you’re portaging your canoe. Get your line moving.”

“He’s crazy,” Pavelich muttered under his breath. “It’ll be a miracle if we survive these practices for five more months.”  

That word “miracle” came up often in reference to surviving Brooks’ practices. I don’t recall anyone using it in reference to winning. That was more like “preparation.”

“[Dave] Silk,” Brooks shouted. “You’ve got million dollar legs and a nickel brain. But we’ll change that in a hurry. Everyone…start thinking out here. Your mind must be quicker than your feet.”

So it went – relentless repetition of skill, speed and decision making, stopping only for short timed rest intervals. The pace was never comfortable. Other teams had practiced at comfortable speeds, and when they played the Soviets, they were on edge the entire night. With the 1980 team, speed was one factor they could control by training.

Team skills, passing, shooting, filling open lanes and sprinting back on defense also improved week by week. “[Rob] McClanahan, you think you’re fast? Remember this: The puck moves faster when you pass it.  Get that puck up ice.”

Nagy, the good doctor was wearing his familiar frown, “It’ll be a miracle if they all survive. I don’t think Brooks can keep this up. We won’t have any players left.”

“Yeah; he’s crazy,” I responded – but not quietly enough.

“I heard that, Cardiac,” Brooks snapped. “You’re an ivory-tower scientist; not a coach. We have to beat teams like the Czechs and Swedes and Soviets. You can afford to theorize. We have to train athletes to execute at a tempo that will shock even those guys in red uniforms. If we don’t train with that intensity, we’ll be relying on miracles.”


Visit Jack’s website at www.overspeed.info.