Thats great thanks, clears most things up…I hadnt incuded the tempo on the volumes but the number were pretty close just not quite there, if I added tempp the vol would be well over the total volume of what is written down at the side as the week speed/high int volume.
The volumes on the charts are high intensity runs only and do NOT include tempo. Add up all the starts and accels, hills etc across the week for the totals. One EFE or FEF = 60m. So for example week one has 28 x 60m = 1680 in 60s alone plus the shorter work to get the weekly total.
I know it looks a bit complicated at first but if you get used to all programs set up the same way, you can see at a glance if the volumes balance out when you are running both types of programs. You’re also right that you can set up the GPP in the same way and you can see how the speed volumes move steadily up to meet the SPP while the tempo vol will max out overall well within the GPP and be kept constant moving forward.
Yeah its just getting head around a newer look/system. Its really good to see it all coming together from the GPP video and sprint short to long information.
Do you recommend using spikes on the grass for the hill work?..we are in the UK and it cen get pretty wet and muddy under foot, so would struggle to get good purchase during the winter months without using spikes!
I would use an old pair of spikes for the hill work and for the initial speed work if you can still do it on the grass. In the UK, you’ll be going indoors at some point and will want to get as much done on the soft surface as you can before the option is gone.
We always use spikes while doing hills on the grass.
You get the exact volumes, if you exclude the Strength Endurance drills (brown boxes).
In both of the set-ups, where do weights fit in? Is it a ‘take what you can get approach’, particularly with the L2S, or is it more structured/concentrated?
Thanks.
Get the lecture series on this as the decision making process is laid out there.
why the bounds first? 
I’ve done this circuit often and find it to be beneficial. The bounds are the most technical, hence they are done first. The run is done at ExT pace and should be light recovery before going into the running A’s for strength endurance. The last portion requires concentration to maintain technique but this is precisely what the athlete wants to focus on at say, the end of a 400m race.
As Charlie said, the strength training videos will fill in the blanks. IMO, the role of weights is somewhat less in L-to-S than in S-to-L due to the greater emphasis on SE. It’s pretty tough to do a hard weight session after 600’s even if they are split.
sorry I wasn’t clear with my question, I understand why you wold place them first in that sequence, I meant why do them at all? Wouldn’t 200m (or whatever distance) + running A’s be enough?
The speed bounds are a great way of working speed-power form - basically development of power from a physical perspective and a technical sprint position.
Although the nature of bounding only bears limited resemblence to a full sprint cycle due to lack of heel recovery, the rear extension and front side dorsiflexion and drive down make the speed bounds great as a form drills while developing power at the same time.
It provides good variety in the programme too! I have used very similar, for example doing 150m runs split into speed bound:sprint:speed bound:sprint for 30-40m per section. Off form work, drills, and this type of power-speed I ran some very good times over 400m with little specific prep work (I ran indoors mainly relays to mix up the winter a bit and ended up making a world indoor team!).
Im big believer in this but the athletes have to have the underlying physical and technical abilities in place for the bounding to work well or you are asking for trouble!
I’ve found, and there is some research to support it, that extended power bounds have positive effect on performance, particularly as it relates to 400m/400mH. The caveat that I put on this is that bad bounding cannot be tolerated. It makes the session worthless, and likely counterproductive. It may take a couple of years to build into this session.
Early on, when I’m doing this circuit, the jumps are alternate leg power bounds. The speed bounds come later, usually just before competitions or even during some of the less important meets, depending on the situation and the annual schedule.
Neither power or speed bounds can be viewed as technically similar to running in terms of mechanics, but I do agree to an extent regarding the positive effects on running form. Even advanced athletes that I have coached seemed to apply force better after starting this type of work. Slowing down the foot contact a little and getting them to feel the ground seemed to be the primary reason. That was their impression at least. It doesn’t have to be in circuit form, but it does need to be done properly.
To me though, bounds a bridge between general strength (ie: weights) and sprinting. In circuit form they can be viewed as close to SE, without the overall stress on the system. Hence my preference is to use them on the final day of a training week when this is possible.
I think you are right about the role of the bounds in the GPP, especially in the L-to-S program, in the transition towards speed work.
I was just reviewing Mach’s training schedules and according to these, he had his athletes do the jump/run/drill circuit twice a week in GPP and carried it right through into the Comp Phase.
When this type of work was introduced into the schedule of two 400m hurdlers who I coached, their times dropped substantially (male 50.84->49.73; female 58.93->57.78). There were some other changes in their training, but I consider this to have been one of the keys to their improvement. They did not train with me at the same period of time, btw.
It was mentioned earlier about the speeds of the runs between the bounds and drills.
Can someone (athletics coach?) suggest what a typical session would look like - sets/reps/bound/run/drill distances
Also would like to look at the speed of the run - ExT pace was mentioned earlier?
Suggested progressions?
I think it is good stuff and would like some more ideas about its use and progression.
Perhaps a rule of thumb might be, run at a pace that allows the running As at the end to be completed with good form and begin to pick up the pace in a fashion that maintains that ability.
The longer this work is maintained in the program, the faster that pace will get.