What about first foot contact to start the stopwatch? I guess that is a kind of roll-in that will improve time.
I think that you are giving UK Cheetah an unnecessarily hard time. There is actually a simpler explanation for the times that he and his group have experienced over 40m in training compared with what one sees at 40m during a 100m at the highest level in championships based on my own personal experience and coaching observations. When athletes run ‘through’ the 40m on there way to a 100m sprint the acceleration is invariably less ‘intense’ than when running just 40m. Even if consciously tryng to run every 10m split as fast as possible on there way to a 100m (or 150m) the times recorded between 20-60m on there way to these distances would be expected to be slower than if they were only accelerating all-out to 20-60m due to the differences in the distribution of energy and force application. If Bolt, Gay or Powell only had to run to 40m at a major championship I would expect to see times that significantly surpassed those they registered on their way to 100m.
My own personal experience is seeing athletes even over short distances have significant differences in times. I have found athletes’ split times at 30m can be 2/10ths slower on there way to a 60m than when they are training at just 30m in the same session! I found this interesting because the sensation for the athlete is that there 60m is all-out, yet even at this relatively short distance the ‘intensity’ level of the acceleration drops slightly relative to even shorter distances (I have even noticed differences between 10 and 20m accelerations!!!).
One final example is the observation of indoor 60m performances and how often athletes are running at 60m in Winter what they fail to achieve 6 months later over 60m on there way to 100m at a major championship when they are fitter and overall better prepared and often have a following wind (Dwain Chambers in 2009 6.42 indoors in March 6.50 on way to a +0.9 10.00 100m in Berlin comes to mind).
I don’t think UK Cheetah has anything to apologise for. I think his times are quite reasonable in the circumstances
This question relates to the thread topic, what about gaining muscle in the upper body? Detrimental at all?
Track007, the numbers are simply too far apart for what you suggest to be possible. It was all due to differences in timing methods - it was covered in a couple of the posts.
yes, very. Its weight your body has to move. Strength-to-weight ratio of the lower body to body weight. Losing fat- gaining muscle would not hurt anything I doubt. It’d help actually
But as long as relative strength stays the same or goes up, would that mean you can continously keep adding mass?
Interestingly all top athletes seem to look ‘balanced’… like Charlie has said I believe. Would David Oliver be faster without the weight of his massive shoulders? Don’t think so.
Considering muscle weighs more than fat?. Or is that just a myth?.
“…One liter of muscle would weight 1.06 kg (1060 grams) and one liter of
fat would weight 0.9 kg (900 grams). In other words, muscle is about 18% denser
than fat. …”
Would it better for a sprinter to develop just the CNS, relative strength & cut hypertrophy as much as possible?.
Why would you continuously want to keep adding mass?.
adding mass is not a good way to get faster. But, you have to add strength somehow- and extra mass is sometimes worth its weight. For instance, has there ever been a fast big guy? Like 250+ pounds? yes, but he would get faster if he lowered his body fat and body weight, while maintaining all of his strength. Easier said than done.
But is weight of little to no importance for lower weight guys/lower level guys? Like for me, 155 pound guy running low 11s, If I bulked to 160-165 and maintained relative strength… there would be zero harm in those 5-10 pounds?
if your strength didnt increase, adding mass will not help you. its just likely that if you put on 10 lbs of muscle the raise in your strength levels would overcome the disadvantage of the extra weight
yea if i were you, i would beef up those legs with heavy weight lifting. That will definitely increase your acceleration. Adding leg mass/(strength) helps you accelerate faster, but can hurt your overall time if your speed endurance does not keep up. That extra weight can bog you down in a 200. Even in a 100.
Edit: Only adding strength will increase your speed (not mass) but its tough to just add strength w/o mass, … and that mass is worth the strength you need to gain. Although, you might be able to use maximal effort reps (1-3) and not add much if any mass.
How would you train an athlete who already has relatively too big upper body compared to legs?
I would put him on a road bike for 2-3 months, before any sprint training or weights.
My upperbody/arms shrink on the bike.
strengthen his legs. A lot. And run him. A lot.
strength = good acceleration
Strength + speed endurance = half way there
I wouldn’t recommend cycling for weight loss of a sprinter as it promotes slow twitch muscle growth, can stagnate the fast twitch, and will decrease the elasticity of the athlete.
Cut back on the upperbody weights, if he/she is doing them.
Do you think it is detrimental to performance?
Why not focus on pure strength/power work when upper body work is done, and bulk up the legs?
Hence, I would put him on a road bike for 2-3 months, before any sprint training or weights, once the weight’s gone, continue as you left off or just began.
Just to point out, cycling I have found is one, if not, one of the best ways to increase stride rate, turnover & developing power in the hip flexors.
It sure didn’t promote slow twitch muscle growth for me, I just kept hitting the weights.