Series: THE STRONGMAN COACH: FROM IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL TO PERFORMANCE - Episode 9: Coaching on Competition Day

On competition morning an athlete enters the warm-up area believing the only task is to lift as much as possible. Then the event order changes, the log platform differs from training and only twenty minutes separate the yoke from farmers. A capable coach does not treat these changes as a personal insult. The coach observes, checks the rules, reprioritises and gives the athlete one clear next decision.

This ninth episode of THE STRONGMAN COACH: FROM IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL TO PERFORMANCE examines tactics, warm-up, logistics, communication with referees, emotional regulation and real-time decisions. Research on tapering, warm-up and strongman biomechanics provides useful foundations, yet no trial establishes a universally optimal strategy for every strongman contest [1–5]. The examples are practical coaching procedures, not protocols validated for every event.

1. Define responsibilities before the venue becomes chaotic

The coach cannot simultaneously act as transport manager, referee, physician and full-time videographer. The team allocates roles beforehand: checking the official programme, following changes, guarding equipment, recording points and entering the athlete area where permitted. A lone coach should reduce the system to essential functions. Impressive multitasking is less valuable than a simple procedure performed reliably.

The athlete also needs to know which decisions remain theirs. They make an informed choice about an attempt; the coach provides tactical judgement and may decline to supervise a lift judged unsafe. Acute medical problems remain within clinical responsibility. Practical authority is not unlimited control over another person's body, and agreement reached during calm training sessions works better than negotiation in a noisy corridor.

2. Translate the rulebook into decisions

Read the full rulebook rather than only the implement weights. Time limits, repetition validity, referee commands, equipment restrictions, tie-breaking and start order all matter. A one-minute log for repetitions is a different problem from a maximum log with three attempts. A farmers carry with a turn is different from a straight track. The coach writes down unknown details and verifies them during the technical briefing.

Rules can be simulated in training, but the organiser's final regulations govern the competition. Ask the head referee precise questions: 'Is an overhead lockout valid with staggered feet?' or 'May straps be reset between carries?' Arguments based on vague recollections waste energy and strain official relationships. Calm confirmation, recorded when possible, gives decisions a defensible basis.

3. The competition dossier

A useful dossier fits on one or two pages: timetable, address, contacts, scoring rules, event order, time limits, permitted equipment, implement dimensions, surface notes and relevant preparation-test results. It is not a statistical novel. It is a map for moments of reduced attention. A phone copy and an offline copy reduce logistical fragility.

Write down three different targets: desired ranking, controllable execution and safety decisions. A podium place depends on rivals; implement position, early pacing and compliance with commands are more directly controllable; withdrawal when warning signs arise must remain possible regardless of points. Distinguishing these aims prevents every ranking fluctuation from becoming a personal crisis.

4. Contest selection and athlete fit

Competition-day outcomes reflect decisions made months earlier. A contest built around pulling and carrying rewards a different profile from one dominated by maximal log and deadlift. Consider experience, health, equipment access and realistic objectives. Entering every available contest is not obligatory evidence of ambition; sometimes it merely reflects poor scheduling.

Compare familiar training events with contest events, while allowing for surprises. The same yoke mass may be distributed differently; an atlas stone can have another texture and a frame can change grip demands. Strongman biomechanical reviews justify attention to implement differences but cannot predict precise times from a single variable [5].

5. Tapering: arrive prepared, not merely rested

Tapering aims to reduce fatigue without losing training adaptations. Bosquet and colleagues found benefits of substantial volume reductions with maintained intensity across several sports [1]. A numerical percentage should not be copied mechanically into strongman. Fatigue after heavy yoke sessions, deadlift tolerance, injury history and competition experience may require different durations and structures.

Final sessions should preserve rhythm and confidence rather than generate social-media proof. Missing a personal record five days before a contest does not automatically mean fitness vanished. Track familiar performance, symptoms, sleep and perceived exertion together. The goal is to protect the capacity to produce force on the relevant day, not to win Wednesday's training session.

6. Travel, sleep and the logistical cost of performance

Long travel may produce prolonged sitting, disrupted meals, shorter sleep and no time to inspect the venue. Establish a simple order: arrive with a buffer, confirm the timetable, secure food and water, identify a rest area, then organise equipment. Exotic rituals are unnecessary. A local meet may need a minimal plan; international travel with connections warrants redundancy.

One difficult night does not automatically erase preparation, but cumulative disruption matters. Decisions should reflect the athlete's response rather than an assumption that everybody requires one perfect sleep number before every record. Marked fatigue, dizziness, illness or other concerning symptoms require safety-first decisions. A crowded schedule does not turn symptoms into mere psychological obstacles.

7. Inspect the implements before the start

Seeing the actual implements prevents avoidable errors. For the yoke inspect crossbar height, clearance, surface and finish line; for farmers examine handles, course and turns; for log consider diameter, handle spacing and lockout standards; for stones check diameter, texture and loading platforms. Never alter equipment without permission. Inspection should adjust expectations and technical cues, not provoke complaints about every variation.

Ask the athlete for observable impressions: 'the handle is thicker', 'the surface has less traction', 'the platform requires greater extension'. Statements such as 'this implement will definitely ruin me' provide no plan. A useful observation leads to action: adjusting grip, reconsidering permitted footwear or changing step sequencing. Every adaptation must comply with the rules.

8. Warm-up: specificity and energy economy

An effective warm-up is not measured by how many kilograms were lifted backstage. Research generally supports warm-up benefits, although optimal designs depend on the event and delay before performance [2,3]. In strongman, progressive movement, a few specific exposures and a final confidence-building effort can prepare the athlete without consuming useful repetitions. The exact amount should be learned from previous training and competitions.

A maximal log warm-up may progress from light equipment to a few attempts approaching the opener. For a speed-oriented farmers event, two short carries may be more useful than one long set that fatigues the grip. Equipment availability can change the order. Monitor breathing, coordination and remaining time; warm-up supports the event rather than becoming a parallel competition.

9. When warm-up ends too early

Starts slip in real competitions: a dispute takes time, equipment needs repair or groups are called late. The final warm-up lift should not automatically be repeated whenever a delay is announced. Estimate the remaining time and choose between light movement, maintaining warmth and brief specific reactivation. Repeating heavy singles every ten minutes can turn an organisational delay into physiological fatigue.

There is no universal rule that a warm-up must restart after a specific number of minutes. Research highlights the transition phase, mainly in sports other than strongman [3]. Use the athlete's history and actual conditions: ambient temperature, clothing, crowding, waiting time and perceived readiness. Communicate verified information rather than rumours disguised as official start times.

10. Event order changes strategy

A maximal deadlift at the beginning may produce different fatigue for the yoke than the same deadlift at the end. Consider overlapping muscles, grip demands, local discomfort and recovery intervals, not just energy expenditure. A coach can identify scoring opportunities and events where secure execution is the priority. That does not mean automatically abandoning every less favourable event.

The initial plan includes a revision rule. After each event update points, athlete condition and realistic potential gains from the next attempt. Do not fabricate percentages to make judgement look scientific. Without reliable historical distributions, discuss qualitative scenarios: acceptable minimum, plausible result, exceptional result and consequences of failure.

11. Scoring is a tool, not an identity

The same log weight can produce different points depending on the field and tie-breaking rules. One extra kilogram can win three positions at one contest and none at another. Calculate the marginal value of an attempt: what concrete ranking change could it cause? That is more useful than simply saying 'lift your maximum'. When intermediate points are uncertain, label calculations provisional.

Communicate rankings to support decisions rather than amplify anxiety. One athlete wants updates after each event; another prefers only strategically relevant information before the final attempt. Agree on that preference beforehand. The coach should not conceal facts, but should choose timing and detail that help the athlete perform the next task.

12. Selecting the opening attempt

An opener should secure a valid result and provide information about how the athlete handles the implement. It is not a courage test. If the first log attempt is near the genuine limit, a small grip or judging difference can jeopardise the event. Choose the opener from recent repeatable performances rather than an all-time best achieved under different circumstances.

Prepare branching decisions: what if the opener flies, what if it is slow but technically sound, what if a referee rejects it? The second attempt need not automatically be heavier if the first exposes a risk. Organisers differ in whether and when weight changes are allowed; the coach must check available options.

13. Log and axle: technical cues amid noise

In a loud arena, a lecture on scapular angles is useless. Use one or two previously rehearsed cues, such as keeping the log close during the clean or securing the lockout until the command. Cues must fit the athlete's established movement. New instructions under pressure can disrupt an automated skill. A missed attempt should be classified by evidence: insufficient force, balance loss or rule violation.

Foot position, implement path and time spent stabilising can be decisive. Yet one video frame cannot establish the cause of failure with certainty. If time permits, compare several attempts and select one change for the next lift. If it does not, clarity and confidence are often more useful than ambitious last-minute biomechanical diagnosis.

14. Deadlift: attempt order and the cost of a maximum

In maximal deadlift, jump selection depends on the attempt count, tie-breaks and recovery time. A large increase reduces exposures but risks failure; a small one may secure points while preserving later events. No universal optimal jump formula exists. The coach must know whether each kilogram matters and whether a miss permanently consumes an attempt.

Deadlift suits, straps, bars and starting height can substantially change the feel compared with training. Introducing untested equipment in competition is avoidable gambling. If an unfamiliar sticking point or acute pain appears, the answer is not automatically louder encouragement. Assess the situation, respect medical warning signs and recognise that protecting the athlete may be worth more than extra points.

15. Yoke: acceleration, stability and finish line

Yoke is not merely an isometric strength exhibition; it is a loaded locomotion task involving oscillation, rhythm and course control. Biomechanical research supports careful observation but does not prescribe one universally ideal stride [5]. Watch the first three foot contacts, stability during turns and load behaviour after acceleration. A violent start that provokes oscillation can lose more time than it saves.

Competition-day coaching must be brief: 'lift, settle, move', or another rehearsed sequence. Wet flooring, slope or crossbar height can affect strategy without changing nominal weight. If putting the yoke down incurs a penalty, a sustainable rhythm may be preferable; where resets are permitted, one might be tactical. Never assume an advantage without checking the rules.

16. Farmers and frame: grip as a finite resource

In farmers carries, grip fatigue may accumulate across warm-ups, previous events and failed attempts. Track movement speed alongside grip security. Saving one second at the start can be erased by dropping an implement halfway. Course analysis must therefore include turns and the rules governing subsequent pickups.

Frame dimensions and handle geometry can change the setup entirely. Do not impose generic stance corrections; start from the actual implement and the athlete's demonstrated control. Before the start, check the surface, start line and exact timing finish. An otherwise strong run that stops short of the line can waste months of preparation.

17. Atlas stones and sandbags: tactics for awkward objects

In awkward-object events, contact mechanics can be as important as maximal strength. A slippery atlas stone or shifting sandbag changes demands relative to familiar equipment. The coach watches grip preparation, lap transition, extension and distance to the platform. Where tacky is permitted, its type and application should be rehearsed and checked beforehand.

Do not race a loading medley blindly. Object order, carrying distance and platform height determine where seconds are won and repetitions lost. In a five-object sequence, sprinting between the first two may undermine the fourth. Coach planned breathing points and economical routes, but only when the strategy has been tested in training.

18. Pulling and endurance events: efficiency over spectacle

In truck pulls, the start, coordination between trunk and legs and footwear-surface interaction matter more than verbal aggression. Harness pulls, arm-over-arm pulls and rope-assisted variants are not equivalent tasks. Check course markings, traction conditions and permitted signals. If resistance varies along the course, adapt legally rather than improvise recklessly.

In repetitive events, pacing can matter more than the first repetition's speed. Choose sustainable cadence using tests with similar durations rather than the blanket rule 'always start all-out'. One athlete may benefit from brief clusters, another from continuous work. Event rules determine allowable pauses and resets. Judge strategy by valid repetitions, not by how intense it looks.

19. Referee communication: respect, precision and evidence

A coach may request clarification and challenge inconsistencies through the rules, but should not turn every no-rep into confrontation. First identify the stated reason: incomplete lockout, expired time, dropped implement or missed command. If appeals are allowed, use the specified format, deadline and channel. Personal video can help analysis but does not automatically override the official procedure or possess evidential authority.

Tone affects whether a useful clarification is obtained. A specific question is better than a general accusation of bias. When an apparent error occurs, preserve information, submit the correct request and shield the athlete from needless escalation. Their performance should not be consumed by somebody else's dispute. Respecting officials does not prohibit criticism, but criticism should rest on identifiable facts and rules.

20. Coaching cues during an event

More commands do not mean better coaching. An athlete carrying a heavy yoke cannot process simultaneous instructions about breathing, stride, head position and rankings. Agree on priorities beforehand. Training can reveal whether the athlete responds to one word, timing calls or silence. Competition is the wrong place to test a stream of novel instructions.

A coach must know when to stay silent. Feedback delivered midway through an irreversible movement may distract and alter execution unpredictably. Some events allow useful communication between repetitions, not during them. Others benefit from time calls where rules permit. Information should arrive at the point where a safe, realistic adjustment remains possible.

21. Managing pressure without magical psychology

Competition anxiety is not a character defect. Activation varies between athletes and events. A coach should not promise to erase emotion with one inspiring sentence. Instead rehearse a brief routine: check the implement, recall one technical cue, take a deliberate breath, confirm the rules and focus attention on the first controllable action.

More extensive psychological interventions belong to appropriately qualified professionals when needed. In ordinary coaching, language still matters: 'you have two tasks to execute' helps more than 'you are not allowed to fail'. The athlete decides how to interpret the stakes. The coach can offer clarity and predictability, not guarantee that pressure disappears.

22. Nutrition and hydration: familiar before novel

Competition day is not the occasion for adventurous gastrointestinal experiments. Athletes need familiar foods, fluids and enough time to eat without rushing. Duration, temperature and event sequencing affect individual requirements, yet specific carbohydrate, sodium and fluid plans depend on nutritional and medical context. Coaches should not introduce restrictive diets or new supplements at the last minute.

The practical question is whether the athlete can eat and drink in real contest conditions, not whether a spreadsheet looks perfect. With unpredictable breaks, accessible, tolerated foods may outperform a theoretically elegant plan that cannot be implemented. Severe gastrointestinal symptoms or illness require reassessment; stimulants are not substitutes for sleep or health.

23. Heat, cold and contest surfaces

In outdoor contests an athlete may move from wet flooring to hot asphalt or unstable grass. Monitor conditions, confirm course changes and adjust permitted footwear, shade, rest and warm-up. Indoor results do not transfer mechanically to heat. Signs of exertional illness in extreme conditions require prompt medical attention.

Cold introduces different demands: maintaining warmth, perceived stiffness and slippery surfaces. There is no universal solution here either. Arrange opportunities to rewarm and protect time between events without turning every weather change into a predicted disaster. Respond to observed exposure rather than dramatic speculation.

24. When the athlete underperforms in the opener

A poor first-event result has many possible explanations: execution, judging, unfamiliar equipment, tactical selection or ordinary variability. Separate observations from interpretation. 'You lost five seconds at the turn' is information; 'the entire training cycle failed' is a disproportionate conclusion. Protect the next event from a rushed emotional autopsy.

The immediate discussion should produce no more than one or two actions: inspect equipment, reconsider pacing or revise the next attempt selection. Save the full analysis for later. The athlete needs orientation, not a public trial in front of competitors. Professionalism is revealed by how quickly the team regroups.

25. When the athlete unexpectedly wins the opener

Success can distort judgement as much as failure. After a surprising event win, the athlete may want reckless jumps or abandon the energy-management plan. Celebrate the result but assess its physical cost and what remains. The points earned are real; a conclusion that the athlete is suddenly invincible is not.

The post-event routine should remain similar after success or failure: fluids, recovery, scoring update, schedule check and brief preparation for the next task. This consistency reduces unnecessary emotional swings. Coaches need not suppress joy; they should prevent it from overriding important decisions.

26. Incidents and the threshold for stopping

Sudden pain, obvious loss of function, dizziness, confusion or other warning signs are not ordinary tactical variables. Stop unsafe exposure and seek appropriate medical assessment; do not repeatedly test the painful area to improvise a diagnosis. A continuation decision cannot be reduced to the points gap. Return-to-sport principles require health, risk and context to be considered separately.

If the athlete insists on continuing, explain the limits of coaching responsibility. Do not shame them into stopping, or promise that tape or medication eliminates risk. Qualified clinicians assess clinical concerns and officials apply event procedures. Stopping one unsafe attempt can be among the day's most important coaching decisions.

27. Case study: the podium depends on the final log

Hypothetical scenario: after four events, podium positions are separated by one point. The athlete has one log attempt remaining. The weight required to advance was achieved in training, but today's first clean was unusually slow. The decision cannot rest on the podium alone; check the previous lift's validity, current athlete condition and rule-permitted alternatives.

If only ordinary fatigue is present, without worrying signs, the athlete may elect to attempt it after informed discussion. Acute pain or clearly compromised control changes that decision regardless of the points available. Tactics are not a secret formula. They are a process of weighing potential gains against plausibility and possible costs.

28. Case study: a two-hour delay

Hypothetical scenario: warm-up is complete when the organiser announces a two-hour delay. The athlete is already sweating, has performed several heavy lifts and lacks a rest area. The coach confirms the official notice, secures a recovery space and avoids unnecessary repeated heavy attempts. A brief reactivation is planned from confirmed timing, not surrounding rumours.

If the delay extends again, revise the plan again. The relevant skill is not predicting the exact start, but preserving resources and maintaining communication. After the meet, document what worked and what should be prepared for unstable future schedules. Logistics then become a performance component that can be improved.

29. Case study: a disputed no-rep

Hypothetical scenario: an athlete completes a deadlift that a referee rejects. Teammates insist it was perfect and footage seems favourable. The coach does not adopt the crowd's verdict. Ask which rule was breached, determine whether an appeal exists and follow its deadline. If the ruling stands, prepare the next competitive task immediately.

Later video review may reveal a real technical fault or a debatable ruling. These are distinct findings. A mature system separates procedural appeal from technical evaluation and broader criticism of organisation. Disagreement is allowed; uncontrolled expenditure of attention and emotional energy is not useful.

30. A practical coach command sheet

A command sheet can repeat five questions before every event: what rule matters most, what is the genuine objective, which technical cue will be used, what information is missing, and what would require stopping? Answers should be short. Afterwards add the result, one relevant observation and any reason to revise strategy. A paper sheet or phone is sufficient; complex software is optional.

The sheet should remain flexible and never replace judgement. Data may be incomplete and an athlete may perform differently than expected. A good form supports professional reasoning and athlete communication. When time is scarce, record only information that could change the next decision.

31. The final event and the temptation to risk everything

The final event compresses a day's work into a short period. Trying to recover ranking positions can be justified when the odds, rules and athlete's condition support it; drama alone is not sufficient. The coach presents two or three intelligible choices with their benefits and costs. The athlete makes an informed decision within safety and rule constraints.

Sometimes protecting the ranking already earned is the strongest choice. In other situations a moderate tactical risk offers genuine improvement. Neither choice should be confused with cowardice or poor competitive spirit. Mature performance involves selecting appropriate risk, not seeking maximum risk by default.

32. After the finish: recover and review without rush

Immediately after competition, athlete welfare comes first: food, fluids, attention to concerns and practical recovery. Do not force a comprehensive review while the athlete is exhausted, disappointed or euphoric. Capture facts that will otherwise disappear: event order, times, points, valid attempts, equipment differences and rule changes. Deeper interpretation can wait.

In the following days compare the planned decisions with what actually happened. Do not attribute outcomes to one simple cause or retroactively portray every good choice as inevitable. A useful review identifies two practices to retain, two to change and one question to test in the next cycle. The competition becomes evidence for development rather than a final verdict.

33. Conclusion: coaching organises decisions, not just encouragement

Competition day demands a difficult combination: reading rules, organising logistics, observing implements, limiting warm-up fatigue, selecting tactics, communicating and respecting professional boundaries. The most valuable decisions are often quiet ones. A well-timed referee question, an intelligently shortened warm-up or declining an unsafe attempt may matter more than a dramatic speech. Coaching turns uncertainty into a sequence of transparent choices.

In the final tenth episode we will integrate initial assessment, programming, communication, video analysis, recovery, safety and competitive experience into an accountable long-term coaching system. The purpose of a coaching series is not to invent an infallible hero. It is to describe a profession that learns and takes responsibility for its decisions.

References and scientific sources

Methodological note. The cited studies address warm-up, tapering, athlete monitoring and strongman biomechanics. Findings in other sports cannot automatically be transferred to every strongman event. Competition scenarios are fictional teaching examples, not controlled trials or individual medical advice.

[1] Bosquet, L., Montpetit, J., Arvisais, D., & Mujika, I. (2007). Effects of tapering on performance: A meta-analysis. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 39(8), 1358–1365. https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013e31806010e0

[2] Fradkin, A. J., Zazryn, T. R., & Smoliga, J. M. (2010). Effects of warming-up on physical performance: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(1), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c643a0

[3] McGowan, C. J., Pyne, D. B., Thompson, K. G., & Rattray, B. (2015). Warm-Up Strategies for Sport and Exercise: Mechanisms and Applications. Sports Medicine, 45, 1523–1546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0376-x

[4] Mujika, I., & Padilla, S. (2003). Scientific bases for precompetition tapering strategies. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(7), 1182–1187. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000074448.73931.11

[5] Hindle, B. R., Lorimer, A., Winwood, P., & Keogh, J. W. L. (2019). The Biomechanics and Applications of Strongman Exercises: A Systematic Review. Sports Medicine - Open, 5, 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-019-0222-z

[6] Halson, S. L. (2014). Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in athletes. Sports Medicine, 44(Suppl 2), S139–S147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0253-z

[7] Gabbett, T. J., Nassis, G. P., Oetter, E., et al. (2017). The athlete monitoring cycle: a practical guide to interpreting and applying training monitoring data. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 51(20), 1451–1452. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-097298

[8] Winwood, P. W., Keogh, J. W. L., & Harris, N. K. (2011). The strength and conditioning practices of strongman competitors. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(11), 3118–3128. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e318212daea