In your line of work, you emphasise the importance of training coordination over isolated strength to mind elaborating this approach, I guess, for the audience being strengthening coaches that might be perhaps following them off sort of traditional model of strength training and conditioning. Well, firstly, I have to look at a traditional model and see what the weak point is. The weak point actually has two things that are really weak point. The first weak point that I saw that I didn't want is that it's utopian, right, classic training, because you find one, let's say, one approach with all the details in it that is not just plotting out what the benefits are of the training, but also plotting out what the negatives are. It's not there. They're only pulled out of positives, and that's utopian, because an existing body in search that if you want to improve one thing out of self-contaction, it will decrease something else, like something else that will go backwards. What would be some of the negative adaptations to that traditional model of strength and power training as examples that perhaps we're not seeing as coaches or maybe athletes that are doing those practices might not be aware of the negative effects that are starting to outweigh the positive benefits of that type of training? One of the most interesting things that became across is when we wrote an article on the data for development. So I wrote it to Gatavit, Basvenhor, who needed all the dirty work, about taking all the credits, usually is, but he's done a lot of good work here. If you look at what's out there in classic strength training literature, it says that high resistance, ballistic training is very good for rate of force development. What I said to Basvenhor is that you have to look to all the articles you can find on rate of force development and training. What you have to look at is what resistance that they use to measure rate of force development against? Do you think traditional strength training negatively influences peripheral motor control? Yes, that's because one thing you don't need in traditional strength training is co-contractions, because it's the muscle against the resistance, and that is where the equilibrium comes from. Where if you look in explosive sports, the peripheral motor control is based on properties of muscles, but they need to be activated, and that can only be activated by co-contractions prior to the moment they have to correct things. So if I run, I have typically swing-like retraction. In the swing-like retraction, I build up the tension in all the muscles, and then when the ground hits the foot, then these muscles can correct the arous and that's peripheral control. Can you explain the difference between attractors and fluctuators? I know that's something you've mentioned before, perhaps in the context of Australian rules football, if possible, or a field-based sport, team-based field-based sport? Yes, it's talking about AFL a little bit. So if you take AFL, it's Mayhem. It's basically two packs of drugs, so it's a lip and travel part, but we'll have much structure in it almost. So if you have that, then you have a very complex environment. And if you look at the body, it's also very complex. You have a very complex body and a very complex environment. If you combine those two, you're not capable of controlling it anymore. It's too complicated. So there's one thing you can do is make your body simpler. So where you have 150 joints that can move in other directions, make sure 140 joints that you don't need to control. And you do that by go contracting. So joint gets into its sweet spot and stays there because all the muscles are interacting with each other and you find the sweet spot where your joint is strongest. And those are almost self-stabilizing components of movement. And those self-stabilizing components of movement are called attractors. Why do you think ACLs are so prevalent these days in field and court sports like your NFL soccer NFL? I think it's all if you're interested in female soccer, it's been now a bigger issue in a lot of discussion about it. And there gave all kinds of reasons and other reasons as a whole, yeah, coordination. But if you look at after we've been looking at all virtually all non-contagational injuries and they're all the same, it's always the same movement pattern that goes wrong. So what you have, if you're on the field, you have face transitions, one organization principle and then you jump to another organization principle, there could be acceleration to deceleration, there could be acceleration to a sidestep and so on. And if people are not capable of making very clean transitions from one organization principle to the next organization principle, they end up in a position where self-protection is not possible. And that's where the ACLs happens.