Well! Andy O:
Thank you for explaining the value of non-specific lactate work and rotated training to Scarface- and to me as well.
To support your arguement, you point to a 200m performance we can look forward to from you at some point in the future.
Beyond that, you suggest your non-specific, lactic period theories are more vital for Soccer (or Football as you prefer) and that anyone who disagrees with you is Fked (including Dr. Bill Laich, who prepared the 1986 Argentine World Cup winners and the successful Spanish distance program for the 1992 Olympics with a high/low approach, as well as Val Nesedkin, whose research with the Omega Wave system has validated these findings) .
In fact, you are so knowledgeable on the subject that you’ve published a book.
I could argue with you and point out:
1: That there is NO Special Endurance in Soccer- just short bursts and plenty of aerobic fitness.
2: Middle ground, non-specific work interferes with the ability to carry out high quality speed work and low speed aerobic work.
3: Lactic capacity is obtained through the Special Endurance itself.
4: Serially rotating stimulae leads to repeated adaptation stress and muscle tightness during each transition - leading to a lower direct exposure of the non-functioning muscle to a given training load at best and, worst case, training losses due to injury, with that risk increasing exponentially as the season progresses towards increased intensity- when it can least be afforded.
5: The serial rotation of training through the speed ranges will fatally limit the total seasonal volume of high intensity speed work (95% and up). What’s worse, the intermediate speed work occurs well enough into the season that its detremental effects occur just before you add what little speed work your program has time for, prety much guaranteeing that… well, to paraphrase you… you’re Fked!
6: And… well, by now I’ve lost your attention, as you’re convinced you’re right and I have nothing to teach you … like the rest.
As you say… good luck.
VERY well said !!!
Charlie I thank you for your input,what a mind what great knowledge, of course thats why you have coached a football(soccer) team to to geat victories, like the champions league, oh yeah you haven’t!!!
Am not saying I have, but I worked with the most successful football(soccer) team in europe ever, and understand the concepts of how to train for great football!
I came on this site to share my knowledge and experience and I have nothing but negativity.
So on this point you are jst all wrong!!!
Lactate training in a sport-specific manner is important. You do not de-train your speed work by working at 80-95% intensities once a week, that is bullsh*t! IT IS OBVIOUS that by the actual playing of a sport, you are doing the most sport-specific movements possible and training the most sport-specific energy systems. How can that have negative training effects???
Like an elite soccer team really benefits from a S&C coach. The most successful football team in Europe is successful because of their budget. If I had enough money I could pay Mo, Gatlin, and Crawford to run for my squad and say I was involved with the most successful sprint squad. It’s when you consistently build elite players from nothing that you know you have a good training system. I’m sure you coached them to victory!
Now onto Blinky’s comment. While I realize the value of sport-specificity one can’t get out of hand. There are times when the speed work needs to be limited in order to bring strength or fitness levels up. There is also a certain toll taken by practicing your sport that needs to be evaluated. You cannot just play your sport and become successful. That will lead to overuse injuries and burnout.
oh no! Charlie is the bad guy again :eek:
VERY, VERY well said!
BTW, every time i see your signature, i put a smile on my face 
First of all, you don’t know shit about who I’ve worked with or in what sports, nor can any amount of posturing on your part place you on a level with Bill Laich.
Second, the team you are associated with knows how to win at the highest levels- but this does not imply that, by extention, YOU know how best to train, as clearly you don’t.
If I come off as testy, it is because I am- I’ve seen the damage done by programs filled with intermediate non-specific lactate work. I’ve seen the proof, base on Omega wave research and, in Vancouver we were shown that the damage to long-term aerobic capacity is permanent.
You came on this site with all the conviction of a Creationist to tell everyone how right you are, not to test your beliefs.
You just don’t get it! You don’t want to get it!
Maybe you can separate the two statements or explain further. High intensity game play is not the same as intermediate speed lactate work.
Charlie, I have a few questions. I’m an 800m runner and have found this to be the distance most related to the demands of soccer (midfielder, at least). I always one of the fastest players on the field. Do you think this is because being an 800m I have a above-average aerobic capacity and speed, and not from the intermediate speed of middle-distance training?
There can be a relationship as you suggest, and, often soccer players can switch events from soccer to sprints (Pavoni- 100, 200m) and 400 and 800m with specific special end preparation (Fiascanaro [Sp?])
Andy you have to show some respect here.
This isn’t andyO.com with Charlie coming after you on your forum.
You are a guest on charlie’s forum.
You were only a couple of years old when he coached world record athletes.
You are running 21.9 for 200m at ~19 years of age which shows good potential but you are by no means an expert on sprint training or remotely close to world class. This is especially evident from the content of your posts here.
It is great to have opinions and to share them but you are putting them across as fact while at the same time berating members and Charlie personally.
In my opinion that is immature and completely unacceptable.
Look, nobody has to operate as if their opinion is less important than anyone elses, or be old (thanks for reminding me!), or run fast. You just have to act reasonably towards the other members. If you disagree, make an arguement as to why and the discussion can go from there.
On the flip side Charlie many speed/ext. tempo programmes can be just as dangerous in terms of injury and stagnation - it entirely depends on how the programme is being managed.
As you’ve said you have been convinced for decades on your opinions and have finally found “proof” (which has not been elaborated on) in two forms that are apparently inaccessable to those curious to hear about it, whilst dismissing proof that intermediate speed training does work: results. You explained, to a shocked Tim Lane, that you wouldn’t change a thing in Michael Johnson’s programme, yet MJ’s training primarily revolved around intenities in the 75-95% range - an area which you suggest is the death knell for both endurance and speed. Having watched Clyde Hart coach at the last two Olympics (With both seasoned and developing athletes), it has to be said that the man pays incredible attention to detail and that this has probably played a great role in the success of his athletes (Medals at every major since ‘91, with the exception of Paris last year, is not a thing to be sneezed at, nor are his college accolades) - as is probably the case with the success of you and your athletes.
As it stands, most of the worlds top athletes live off a base developed in that intermediate pace range, Baylor guys with their 10x100m off 3 min at 85-90% and 2-5x350m ranging from 52.5-42seconds off short rest, speed makers and nearly the rest of their sessions (which also lacks any special endurance component), HSI with their 3x300m off 5min rest in around 38s, their 400,300,200’s off 10 min, 6x150 in 18.5, 3x4x100m and not doing true speed until a month or so prior to competition, Linford and Frankie doing a tonne of 22-23second 200’s off short recoveries down at Narrabeen every January for years, along side their 300’s,450’s etc, SMTC with their intermediate ranges much lamented by X-man. In Kit Kats original 400m Training thread from back in the day - endorsed strongly by yourself - he mentions one of Darrens key lactic sessions as being 6x200m in 23s with jog 200m recovery (roughly 87% of his best 200m).
Why have I included this? Because it does appear that as you have stated before that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
This mid range training deals with energy systems in a way that neither extensive tempo or special endurance as defined as <75% and >95% respectively (I also have doubts about tying labels to percentages in such a way, but I won’t go into that now), because it allows for greater control of lactic build up. 95% is great for lactate generation, but pretty weak in terms of developing the systems needed to further break down the pyruvate as well as deal with the lactic acid, whilst 75% does not have sufficient intensity to push the body to the point where lactate will accumulate in a trained athlete. This is where the use of intensive tempo comes in. I’ll use a simplified version of Hart’s 350’s I mentioned (and I believe you mentioned in an earlier thread) earlier as an example:
Initially starts off in the off season at 5x350m at 52.5 seconds with 5-10min rest depending on the athlete, this is initially done on grass - this is approximately 75% for a 46 second athlete. The athlete should finish the session feeling as though they could not have gone any faster on the final rep. As the athlete adapts to the work out (it may take up to 3 weeks for any given intensity) the intensity is increased and/or recovery decreased until they have difficulty completing the session in the specified time (lets say 49 seconds which is around 80% for a 46 second athlete). The work out is then changed to 4x350m in the time that they finished up on for 5. Again as the athlete adapts to the workout the intensity is increased until they can’t go any further forward, we’'l say 45.5s or 85%, whereafter the session is reduced to 3 reps and so on till the athlete is only performing two reps at a little over 90%. Through out the process the athlete is learning to adapt to the production of lactic acid in a highly controlled environment - initially lactic is developed, accumulated and dealt with over 5 reps, then 4, then 3 then 2 and finally during a race or time trial - developing the systems needed for this first over a drawn out and extended period and gradually reducing the period which is has to deal with the LA as well as increasing the rate at which it is produced. Speaking generally this is the type of method many of the worlds top 400m runners, such as Roger Black, MJ and Greg Haughton, have been using for years and are still being used by athletes such as Chris Rock and Williamson and Wariner so I don’t think it is without merit.
Your type of programme has some thing to cover this type of area too - Split reps. However from what I can see, and feel free to correct me here, the main difference between intensive tempo (not necessarily the example type though) and split reps is semantics. They activate the same energy systems, at similar intensities, have similar rest periods and a similar outcome.
So I take the day off from the internet to finish a paper, and this is what I return to! 
I’m talking about game play that would go something like this:
95-100% intensity for 3 - 5 seconds, followed by
75-90% intensity for 20 - 30 seconds, followed by
95-100% intensity for 3 - 5 seconds, followed by
75-90% intensity for 20 - 30 seconds, followed by
rest of 30 - 60 seconds, then repeating the session maybe 15 times.
How would you suggest somebody train for this?
I currently use a speed day and a tempo day. Is there any need for lactate work or aerobic training?
That isn’t what I am saying though.
I am saying that it is great for members to share their opinions just dont put them out there as a statement of total fact and then belittle other members for disagreeing or having a different point of view
The great thing about this forum is the discussion and debate that goes on between members and the information sharing you see as a result.
The successful athletes in Hart’s program have possessed terrific speed (MJ, of course, and Wariner was well under 21.0 in high school), and this was key to the transferrance of alot of what would otherwise be intermediate work to low intensity. Baylor has also had an extroardinary number of injuries over the years among those without that kind of speed. I use the 75th percentile to be absolutely sure I’m in the low intensity catagory but many suggest it could be 80%, which in the case of MJ is something to think about. From first motion, you can expect times faster than your PB by perhaps .5 sec from hand time, giving MJ 18.6 (19.1ht-.5) So, divide by .8 and you’re at still at low intensity at 23.3. Also consider if the runs are from a running start, you can subtract more time.
Additionally, we may be speaking at cross purposes about intensities here, as the “intermediate” speed may occur on what I classify as the high intensity day or the low int day. When you move through a series of what appear to be Spec End runs from 5 reps to 2 then comp, all could be classified as high intensity, especially if the early, higher reps occur on grass. My concern is when the runs are all intermediate daily or when intermediate runs replace low speed between high speed sessions.
You refer to Kit Kat to support your concepts, but I would urge you to speak with him personally about this. He knows you, is near you, is a great and proven resource, and would be willing to help if you ask.
You suggest that a high/low program can be just as dangerous in terms of injuries and stagnation. Perhaps, as it’s hard to make any program foolproof, cause fools are so ingenious, but, personally, I had a very low incidence of ham injuries with my athletes in 14 years with over 30 athletes. The initial of Ben’s two ham injuries in his entire career was due to the stress of appearance commitments outside my control- three trips to Japan in two weeks. I would ask you to compare that to the injury stats for Baylor over the years.
You seem surprised when I said I wouldn’t change anything with MJ. Of course not! Why would I change anything in a program that is working for him? I just want you to be sure you know what you’re looking at.
You refer to an HSI program, suggesting that there is no speed work till the final 4 weeks of the season, yet witnesses training at UCLA saw typical sessions there of 3 x (60, 80, 100), with an easy 300 at the end- moving from the mid 34s to 31s later. This is speed work and it extends for a long time. See what is done, not what is said.
The proof of permanent damage from inappropriate intermediate lactic work I referred to was a premature thickening of the cardiac walls preventing any future increase in the stroke volume so critical to successful long distance work, found on tests. The temporary damage to speed capacity was manifested by a lack of readiness for subsequent speed sessions in the near term, and, with prolonged exposure, overtraining stress that required from 10 days to 6 months to get over.
Those who were at the Vancouver seminar might want to pipe in about the nature of Val’s presentation there. The Omega Wave system is a computerized monitoring system, developed in the Soviet Union to keep track of the readiness status of the top athletes. For more info on that, you should go to the Omega Wave website. they could direct you better than I can. In fact, there may be equipment of this type in Aus. You should check it out and see if you can get access and judge for yourself.
You refer to split-reps. Perhaps they serve a similar purpose but I place them firmly in the high-intensity catagory.
Nice…
Just to add…
Dazed, the difference between split runs and intermediate work is MORE than semantics. It’s intensity! This makes it more akin to Special Endurance! Intermediate work is usually between 80-90&, where Special Endurance is 90-100% The short breaks in a split run is used to be able to MAINTAIN that intensity, while getting the benefits of SE’s LA. High intensity…
Also, based on AB/HSI 2000 season workout, the 2 x 60,80,150 (6.2, 8.3, 15.9) was done as early as December 1999! I agree with Charlie about interpreting what they are doing… I made the same mistakes you did not taking into account that these are sub10, sub20 guys. What might seem clearly to us like intensive tempo is actually extensive tempo on the high end of the scale!
There you again shoutin ya mouth off!
Although I wasn’t born in the 60s, 70s Liverpool FC didn’t have a big budget, infact players were getting paid the same as brick layers! And theire training hasn’t changed since 1968!!!
I’m sure the soccer players of the 70’s could compare to the soccer players of today. Just like the football players of the 70’s are just as good as those today. And the sprinters of the 70’s (with no drug testing!) could compare to those of today. Their traiining hasn’t changed since 1968 because soccer is not a sport where strength and conditioning coaches play a huge role. You are overestimating your role in the final outcome. A guy who holds the WR in every track event contested could still never be an elite soccer player if he didn’t have the technical ability and the intelligence to recognize opportunities and choose an appropriate strategy.
The main job of a S&C coach for elite athletes is to keep them healthy. Look at Coach X over at elite fitness. You will not keep your athletes healthy if you strain their body with excessive intermediate work and will cause a regression in the strengths that they rely on to stay elite.