Like many great debates, much of it comes down to semantics.  People attach their own definitions to terms, yet argue using the same words.  So my definition of ‘hockey specific’ training may be something like “training which enhances an athlete’s ability to succeed in a hockey while reducing their risk of injury”.  To another coach or trainer it may mean having athletes wear skates while doing squats.

So we may argue back and forth for or against the merits of hockey specific training even though we are talking about completely different things.

I had an athlete email me at the end of August asking me if it was okay that he was doing ‘football training’ to prepare for hockey season.  The answer is really ‘yes AND no’.

Some of the strength and power training will be great preparation for hitting the ice.  Some of the energy system training however may not be congruent with your goals on the ice since plays in football are so short relative to a shift in hockey.  The short duration sprints will no doubt have a positive effect on your speed, but the stamina element may be missing.

I explain the difference between hockey specific training and football training in the video below…

Hockey Specific Training vs. Football (video)

So basically, some training is better than no training at all.  Football training will be good for building strong, powerful legs which will have a positive impact on your speed.  It may not be the best for developing the stamina you need to last an entire game.  Make sense?

Cheers,
M