Are Weighted Baseball Velocity Programs Safe and Effective

My son did one last year that was mostly from knees, not actually using the throwing motion.  He did well with it and was more than ready for HS tryouts.

This year he was asked to do a program given by a former MiLB pitcher.  Apparently it starts off with long toss to help condition the arm, then moves into pitching weighted balls.  He swears this is the program they did in the MiLB org....he's probably being truthful.  The problem I have is my kid isn't a man and I don't believe his 15 year old muscles are ready for all that. 

So, he's hitting the bands and weights on his own this winter while shut down from throwing, and we will see how that goes for him. I do NOT think I know more than the MiLB pitching guys but I do know that my son starts loosing velo as the season goes on. HIS particular arm does well when he has 2-3 months off from throwing, so I don't know more about baseball but I am hoping I know more about MY kid.

The answers to the Original Question are; Safe= NO and Effective=YES, respectively. 

For youth level players & underdeveloped teens they are flat irresponsible, at best.

So my son had the opportunity to do this, this upcoming winter.  He is 12.5 years old.  Luckily, he made a team that by doing this program would have created a big conflict so we decided not to go with the program and instead do the elite baseball team.  My personal opinion is that it was His way of telling me it was not good for my son to do this program at this time.  I am glad we decided not to do it after reading that article. 

This study is, as of yet, unpublished, let alone peer reviewed, so we know little concerning the methodology. There are several aspects we do know that raise questions:

* He used 38 subjects between the ages of 13 and 18. The "mean age was 15." 

* He claims an injury rate of 24% from the WB group. However, no number of injuries from a group of 19 makes the math work.

* He claims in an earlier report that there was one major arm injury and two subjects withdrew due to "non throwing related injuries." It is unclear if these two subjects are included in his injury rate.

*without knowing the ages of the injured subjects, it's impossible to draw conclusions from this study. It could be that "there is a risk in weighted balls" or it could be "there is an increased injury risk for those younger than 15 using WB programs" or, given the small sample group, could simply mean "further research would help."

* The program he used is brutal. Again, he lists use of up to 32 oz. balls, but without knowing more about how he used them, there is little that can be concluded.

Unfortunately, at least one major player has taken this research and extrapolated it to a ridiculous conclusion and, without any knowledge of the methodology, has taken this small, unpublished, study and extrapolated it out to the farthest reach of a conclusion, using at support for an article entitled "How weighted balls cause serious injury." In it, he uses this to claim that using weighted balls leads to a 24% chance you'll be injured. 

My belief is that this study used inappropriate subjects and the most extreme weighted ball program he could find making any conclusions suspect.

Steve A. posted:

The answers to the Original Question are; Safe= NO and Effective=YES, respectively. 

For youth level players & underdeveloped teens they are flat irresponsible, at best.

I don't think it's really that black and white. As with any training method, some will see benefit, some won't. Some will have injury issues, some won't.

I think the best observation he makes is this, "I think the most scary trend I am seeing in baseball right now is the blind use of generic weighted baseball programs." Of course the study then goes on to do that exact thing.

Weighted balls aren't a new thing.  Marshall had guys throwing iron balls 20 years ago. The problem we have now is because weighted balls have been seen as a factor in the improvement of some pitchers, everybody thinks throwing around heavy balls is the easy way to go. There's a lot more to developing a pitcher than that.

I have zero surprise though at the results of the study given the protocol used. Who has 13 year old kids doing run and guns with a 16 and 32 ounce ball? That's pretty damn irresponsible on the part of the researchers. Anyone shocked that a good percentage of those kids had injuries?

They were looking for proof that weighted balls cause injuries and used the most extreme program (that no one uses) with 13-18 year olds to prove it.  Great job guys.  That is some fantastic research, but what more would you expect from Pourciau?

Did they mention whether either group applied ice or did distance running after the sessions?  I'm betting every kid in the control group did both thus the zero injury rate.   

But seriously, the ages were a little baffling and the use of "averages" on such a small sample.  Would love to see the entire set of data and you could probably explain some of the outliers.  Would love to see actual stats for those that got injured.  Who says no one can run a good study on arm injury for fear of actually causing injury.  This should be the new standard for the scientific community - "No pain, no gain".

Nothing you do with overhead throwing is safe for the body but I don't think weighted balls are an increased risk vs other high intensity throwing.

The author of this study exposed 19 teenage (mean age ~15) pitchers who had a low throwing velocity (underdeveloped) to a six-week program with little to no ramp up throwing 2 pound balls as hard as possible from a running start (+ other drills) three times per week.

The only weighted ball program similar to this is the National Pitching Association / Tom House program, except the study in question did no holds.

Attached to this post is a sample weighted ball throwing schedule with even more volume than the study in question. Note that the NPA calls their program "safe" and science-based (no published study has ever been done on NPA's program, period).

I think this study was exceptionally risky and I am shocked it passed Institutional Review Board ethics clearing with athletes under the age of 18 signing assent forms.

Kyle Boddy posted:

The author of this study exposed 19 teenage (mean age ~15) pitchers who had a low throwing velocity (underdeveloped) to a six-week program with little to no ramp up throwing 2 pound balls as hard as possible from a running start (+ other drills) three times per week.

The only weighted ball program similar to this is the National Pitching Association / Tom House program, except the study in question did no holds.

Attached to this post is a sample weighted ball throwing schedule with even more volume than the study in question. Note that the NPA calls their program "safe" and science-based (no published study has ever been done on NPA's program, period).

I think this study was exceptionally risky and I am shocked it passed Institutional Review Board ethics clearing with athletes under the age of 18 signing assent forms.

yeah, basically it was a strain to failure test with athletes under 18.

Wait a minute - I just went back and looked at this again...

Study performed at Champion PT and Performance by Mike Reinold

Coincidentally starting this month... https://championptandperforman...performance-program/

Rob T posted:

Wait a minute - I just went back and looked at this again...

Study performed at Champion PT and Performance by Mike Reinold

Coincidentally starting this month... https://championptandperforman...performance-program/

That website is weird!  It's like they tried to merge Eric Cressey and Kyle Boddy into one place, but MOST of what they talk about appear to be applicable to people over 18.

For those wondering about the author, Mike Reinold - perhaps this will help:

https://mikereinold.com/about/

9and7dad posted:

For those wondering about the author, Mike Reinold - perhaps this will help:

https://mikereinold.com/about/

 

I've seen his stuff for years, which is why I'm surprised he conducted a study this way.

He knows having underdeveloped kids throwing 2lb balls as hard as they can is a bad idea - why risk injuring them just to prove it? It's as if he knew what kids shouldn't do, and then had them go out and do it anyway.

It's a strawman study. He set out to prove you shouldn't do something that nobody says you should do.

I think it is certainly a valid topic to study as there are definitely risk/reward factors that need to be considered. There is probably a safe/maybe safe/not safe sliding scale based on the weight of the ball, and physical development of the player.

I just feel the author had an agenda and set out to create a protocol that proved it.

Weighted Ball Velocity training effective in the (relatively) short term?  Yes

Safe?  In terms of long term effects over 10-15 years?  Nobody knows yet.

My kid ain't no guinea pig.  

I checked in to this a couple of years ago.  I ended up asking the coach at his future college, he adamantly discouraged us from any sort of weighted ball training.    recommended a band training program for arm care.

For me, the danger here is the variance among differing programs & the lack of experience & or knowledge of those who administer the programs. Keep in mind, these types of programs are numerous, vary in execution, and are led by untold numbers of "instructors," across the Country.

If my kid were in a program administered by Kyle B directly, I may be OK with it given his experience & knowledge. The fact is, that just because someone has MiLB experience, this does not qualify them to conduct these actions safely. Hell, I have MiLB experience & plenty of it & I will not let my kid anywhere near a weighted ball.

I have witnessed, first hand, the administration of a "Velocity" program here locally where kids as young as 9 were throwing 12 oz balls as hard as they can into a tarp with a running start. Doing deceleration drills holding onto what looked like a lead bowling pin & simulating a throw while hanging on. It frankly made me want to throw up.

I don't care about this guy Reinhold or his study. It's just a matter of common sense. Unless you are super sure your kid is in the best possible care with respect to one of these programs, just say no. This is as far from a cookie cutter throwing program as possible. Every single participant is at a different level & should be treated accordingly. If that is not the case then just engage in all of the other core & lower body strength activities & lay off the weighted ball throws & stick with a standard oz ball & do the program if you wish.    

It's definitely not a cookie-cutter program. It's also fair enough if someone doesn't want their pitcher involved. My point is more about research and the fact that this was apparently poorly done. I say apparently because it hasn't even been published yet so we can't see enough of the methodology to know what can be taken from it. However, someone who already had a bias against WB programs picked it up and ran with it. If you are truly on the fence and trying to make a decision, this study (at the very least, this study at this time) isn't worth considering in the equation.