I find it difficult enough timing home to first. When doing that, I start from their first movement of anything (arm, foot) and stop when they touch the bag. The best way to do 10 yds. would be electronically (both start and stop).
TNT
I second TNT’s response. 10 yards is such a short sprint distance that hand timing’s errors are magnified greatly. Electronic is the only way to go here.
On a further note, I have lots of discussions with our baseball/softball staffs regarding the necessity of a “home to first” timed test. When one counts the swing, it is difficult to make it realistic. Was the player off balance after their swing? The are lots of variables here…
This fall, for baseball, we scrapped the home to first times for an electronic 90 foot/30 yard number. This way, all of the times are standardized…
Not to be a spoiler, but going through the hassle of accurately timing a 10m sprint for a softball player is lost on me. No coach in his right mind would rank a softball player based on a tenth or two in a 10m sprint. Speed is important, but not nearly so much as game skills and game awareness.
Training to improve speed is important, and a huge part of that is reaction time. Batters often hesitate for up to a full second after a big hit before deciding that they better get down the line. Time batters from the moment of impact (bat on ball) to first base. This will teach them to get out of the hole quicker and will improve home to first time more than any sprint program. Second, put a stopwatch on first to second, first to third etc. after a hit ball, again starting time on bat to ball impact. This will improve reaction time as well as working on sport specific sprinting. As far as timing goes, absolute accuracy is not that important. If you can get repeatable results (prescision) then you can monitor progress.
Bottom line, I think the time spent by the athletes and coaches trying to time 10m sprints to the hundreth of a second is wasted time that could be better spent on skills and actual sprint training.
Thanks for the replies. That’s kind of what I thought for the 10 yd. I’ve been using electronic and thus far have seen improvments out of the girls since the start of the fall.
I have emphasized more speed training with them all semester but for the majority it has been working on technique (starts) and getting stronger that I think really has made the difference.
I think you can train all of those qualities. The athletes should first learn utilize their body effeciently from the start, so have them go on your call right away. Because softball/baseball is dependent on reaction times I even have them react to each other from the start. When we test I use electronic and begin from their first movement.
I think you can train all of those qualities. The athletes should first learn utilize their body effeciently from the start, so have them go on your call right away. Because softball/baseball is dependent on reaction times I even have them react to each other from the start. When we test I use electronic and begin from their first movement.
Knowing where athletes are (baseline) and evaluating (testing) whether the program you are running is developing their athletic qualities is fundamental to a well planned program.
These types of tests are best standardized away from the diamond and used as a measure of general acceleration improvement.
I think the 30 yard is a much better test for softball athletes, as a 10 m would require a lot of specific skills in max strength and explosive power.
Why is a 30m a much better test for softball athletes? Are you concerned how fast they sprint from the dugout to the outfield? Center fielder rarely runs even 20m. I agree on using the 10m to monitor if the dose (your training program) you are given them is working and developing the athletic qualities you want.
More fundamental to a program is understanding the very small improvements in lesser important qualities may not be worth the time to test. You’re training for 10-20m sprint time, doing a lot of testing won’t change this type of training much.
I think the 30 yard is a much better test for softball athletes, as a 10 m would require a lot of specific skills in max strength and explosive power.
Very rarely does a softballer sprint 30yards at full acceleration. As mentioned above, overall fitness, reaction time and short accel (10m, and maybe 20m) should be the focus of this type of training. These abilities can, and should be, trained, but a lot of testing and specialized training would be overkill, and would be better spent improving skills.
I’d emphasize the importance of reducing their bodyfat.
As I said in my earlier response the 10 requires a lot of special strength and speed development which require a strong base. Female athletes will be capable of developing foaster over longer distances than shorter ones, and once that is accomplished than you can worry about improved 10 m times.
I dont think any one mentioned overkill or wasting time - just gathering factual data that reveals improvement.
Nap, i am curious as to what your annual plan looks like then if your emphasis or your concerned with improving them over long distances, THEN worrying about improved 10 times. Maybe I misunderstood your post. In the development of the college softball athlete you have one semester which is about 15 to 14 weeks give or take depending on how your school sets finals. My point is you will be much better off if you concentrate your efforts on things that will improve 0-10 m in the weightroom and with your speed work, they will never get out to 30m. I spend the last block of training working on speed out to that distance but that is only 3 weeks out of the off-season. Also developing and focusing on the 0-10m will also contribute to the other factor that separates winners and loser in softball can you generate power at the plate.
Who cares how fast the go at 30m when they never reach it?? and who cares if they improve more over 30m than 10?? yeah that is obvious it is a longer distance, but it isnt track and the concern isnt improving time over 30 m.
If I can quote Al Vermeil “Do what you need to do not whats nice to do”
I never talk in meters always yards, the bases are measured in feet.
It does not matter what you want to do - you have to do what you need to do.
Special strength (MxS - Max strength) and explosive development (high intensity plyos/ explosive jumps) cannot be developed until general strength (Anitomical adaptation / accumulation weights(hypertrophy) are in place.
So in the begining the 30 yrd sprint would be a better indicator of improvement in speed. As your athletes develop the special strength (explosive power) than the 20 and 10 yard sprints could be tested.
Meters or yards however you want to slice it is the same physical qualities 0-10 10-20 20-30 that enhance the speed in those zones.
The fact that you said you have to do what you need to do is exactly what I said.
I thought it was a given that you will spend time in a work capacity phase or GPP which ever you would like to call it. And so at this time your speed work is emphasized and tested out to 30 yds so you can see an improvement in speed? this is during your work cap phase so why is improving speed out to 30 m be a better indicator, because like you said certain qualities need to be developed before others can be. So how would a 30 yd sprint be a better indicator of improvement in speed if they haven’t even developed the qualities for 0-10 and 10-20??
Again who cares if they are faster to 30yds they will never get there. The game is not won or lost by being the fastest to 30yds and having improved speed to 30yds.
Testing should not be done to feel better about your program because it is easier to see improvements to 30 yds than to 10. IF you have the strength and qualities to test at 30 then you have enough to test at 10. You did start from 0 yds and ran thru 30, unless you know how do a 30yd run without running the first part of it?
The amount of testing, and the specialized training that someone might use if 30m speed is though of as a primary requirement for the sport, is in itself a waste of time, IMHO. Integrating start and accel training is easy to incorporate, and should be, but testing 10m times accurately enough to be statistically significant, and performing specialized training not specific to the sport, is a waste.
Doesn’t this way of thinking go against the concept of vertical integration?
Special strength and explosive strength CAN’T be developed until accumulation weights are in place? So the athlete that hasn’t spent any time in the weightroom yet jumps 34" or runs 4.4 for the 40 doesn’t have explosive strength?
yes that is true but as i have said earlier less powerful and less experienced athletes will display strength later in a sprint
yes we already know you believe you should just play the sport all year long and that will be enough - and run some short sprints here and there. Thanks for the input but unfortunatly those days are done! even those athltes who come form socalled latin countries that just play as you say - when they arrive at US colleges and MLB accademies live in the weight room! because the see what it does for their power! dont confuse lack of access and resources and expertise for choosing not to do something valuable.
You have to allow athletes the opportunity to develop in a model that brings about success and vertical integration is extremly valuable.