What about the need to prepare for World Champs, which has multiple rounds and/or multiple events w/ some on successive days? Doesn’t Dan Pfaff use some kind of a 3 day rotation for sprint work?
What an exciting 100m final this will be.
http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/toplists/inout=o/age=n/season=2011/sex=M/all=n/legal=A/disc=100/detail.html
#1 (powell) is out with injury
#2 (gay) is out with injury
#3 (mullings) is out with a positive test
#4 (rodgers) is out with a positive test
#5 (thompson) time seems to be a strange one-off outlier that is 0.16 faster than anything else he’s run in the last 2 years.
#6 (frater) wasn’t originally on the JAM team b/c he didn’t do well enough at their nationals.
#7 (bolt) is having a bad year.
#8 (makusha) hasn’t come close to approaching his NCAA championships times since.
#9 (carter) is seen a real contender
#10 (lemaitre) young white frenchmen is improving and could surprise
#11 (bledman) who?
Way down this list with a 9.95 being his fastest legal time, we have #14 Blake.
It’s not necessary. Ben never had a problem running the rounds and still posting a world record in the final. The “speed reserve” concept allows athletes to run the rounds relax and prime themselves for the semi-final and final. The base of conditioning is there.
NumberTwo, as theory/practice says developing athletes don’t produce much CNS fatique compared with higher level athletes b/c their outputs are lower. But how it correlates with the individuals who better respond to Long to Short program and as I understand when Charlie said this program is more suitable for athletes who are not very explosive, (lurky? sorry my english isn’t best so I don’t know what does it mean) and don’t tolerate much CNS work. Does it mean CNS tolerance and power output not always correlate? Can be the case that there are two high level sprinters with similar power output but one better suits to StL program and another LtS?
Lots of questions. I’ll do my best.
CNS tolerance is not a function of genetics, but more so of development and time. Your ability to tolerate high outputs will develop over time as you build a base of high-intensity work beneath you. However, you are also building a base of low intensity work that will help you to recover more readily from high output workouts/races (assuming you are following an appropriate training program and progression). This is why Charlie liked the short-to-long approach, which included high-intensity runs throughout the year (building a large base of speed work). His contention was that a long-to-short program included a lower overall volume of speed work (and less exposure to speed throughout the year) and, thus, made the athlete more susceptible to injury and CNS overload in the latter stages of training.
This all makes sense in the case of Powell. If he is following a long-to-short program, it will take him longer to reach his peak (i.e. he needs a min of 16 races to be in top form), but it will also make him more susceptible to injury when he is in the thick of competition season with lots of high intensity races week to week. We could say that his CNS tolerance is low due to the progression of training he is following and the lower exposure to speed work throughout the year.
Of course, it is a double-edged sword and when you get to the latter stages of your career, you must back off on the frequency of high intensity workouts because you cannot tolerate higher volumes of work in the high-intensity zone. This could be both a central and peripheral recovery issue, as testosterone levels will begin to level off and drop as athletes enter their thirties. This is represented in one of the graphs we created for Charlie where training volume at the high-intensity level drops off after a number of years. (See below - lower diagram)
Developing athletes with less strength may very well improve more readily on a long-to-short program because of their reduced power output. And, they do need to develop a base of general fitness and strength. They may have lower CNS tolerance, but it doesn’t matter because they can’t training at a high enough output to create that level of fatigue. Remember, much of Ben’s initial training was long-to-short in structure.
Thank you very much! Now things are more clear, just still makes me confused with your last sentences of explanation, maybe I misunderstood something:
“Developing athletes with less strength may very well improve more readily on a long-to-short program because of their reduced power output. And, they do need to develop a base of general fitness and strength. They may have lower CNS tolerance, but it doesn’t matter because they can’t training at a high enough output to create that level of fatigue. Remember, much of Ben’s initial training was long-to-short in structure.”
For sure developing athletes will improve on a long-to-short, but wouldn’t be better start using more short-to-long for better adaptation and CNS tolerance for later stages of training? B/c you said " Your ability to tolerate high outputs will develop over time as you build a base of high-intensity work beneath you. However, you are also building a base of low intensity work that will help you to recover more readily from high output workouts/races (assuming you are following an appropriate training program and progression). This is why Charlie liked the short-to-long approach, which included high-intensity runs throughout the year (building a large base of speed work). His contention was that a long-to-short program included a lower overall volume of speed work (and less exposure to speed throughout the year) and, thus, made the athlete more susceptible to injury and CNS overload in the latter stages of training."
Low intensity, strength base no doubt, but why sometimes it’s better to use long-to-short program for developing athletes? Such program offers longer periods of special endurance and SE workouts and I’m not sure how it could be better for developing athletes and how it builds the base for high intensity work for later stages of training.
its looking like powell may run the relay according to his management team…i dont get this guy!
Guys, for all updates on asafa here is a link to the doylemangement facebook page. Along with Asafa it holds news of Bryan Clay and many other DMG athletes.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Doyle-Management-Group/173236439400467
Like it to continue to get updates
The reason(s) he might run the relay are that it is later in the competition and gives him more time to rehab, and that he’ll only have to run one leg in the final. They are deep enough to easily qualify without him.
I agree with all that No.2 has said but the facts are Steven Francis has many Olympic and World medallists in his squad and Asafa is the only one I am aware of who suffers routinely at the majors. Maybe it’s more down to Asafa than coach Steven.
When Steven spoke at a seminar I organised a couple of years back he said that in Jamaica they don’t have expert therapists like they do in some other countries. And it seems almost anyone with a basic feel for massage can get a job with these elite JAM sprinters. In any case I think the overwhelming weight of evidence shows that coach Francis can: (A) get his people ready on the big day; (B) get them to the line healthy; © get their physical prep ramped up to medal zone.
Amen…
Of course we don’t have the whole story on who else may be whispering in Asafa’s ear. Perhaps the coach doesn’t have total control of Asafa and there are outside influences creating problems. But it is clear the current situation isn’t working for Asafa.
The majority of Stephen Francis’ success has been with female sprinters. Perhaps he has the training volume correct for them (i.e. 20% less than men) and too high for Asafa. KitKat - what is your opinion of this gender difference in his success? Is it planning related? Is there any information you gleaned from your seminar with him? Did anything stick out of his philosophy that could be problematic on the male sprinter side?
Strangely enough, my source tells me that John Smith truly believes Asafa is more naturally talented and has more potential than Bolt. I wonder if Asafa would ever consider moving to another coach or training group?
It is true Stephen Francis’s majority successes have come with females. I cannot imagine however that Asafa would succeed outside of the Islands. He is so quintessentially Jamaican. It would be very interesting to see how he might fare if he teamed up across the road with Glen Mills, Bolt & Co. But it is a move I don’t see either Mills or Asafa embracing, unless Bolt insisted. John Smith no doubt would have success with Asafa but I doubt Asafa could adjust to the LA scene. Although he is extremely well travelled, whenever I’ve met him he’s been surrounded by fellow Jamaicans and it’s like he’s on Island time wherever he is. He is so laid back it’s ridiculous. John though has the chat and the cool to run with his willingness to embrace science and his old school discipline which Asafa appears to need.
I would have to go back over my seminar notes but I cannot recall anything in Stephen’s commentary that led me to think his women athletes may be better suited to his training regime.
One thing I suspect is that Asafa may need better and more therapy than the women sprinters in their group. Even if the therapies are available I wonder whether Asafa is religious about submitting to them? I recall Charlie saying that during the competition phase he would have his therapists “all over” Ben, up to five times a day or whenever/whatever he needed to preserve function and form.
I know for myself, there was a period a few months ago when my training was ramping up a Lot. To do so, i had to therapy nearly the same volume in time as my training… Personally, i would rather cull a session short and do extra Therapy to prevent an injury than keep training and try and treat an injury.
Squirming, Powell admits he could do more still to win. “Sometimes I’m at home and I remember I’m supposed to do 100 push-ups and I don’t. Sometimes my coach will call me and say: ‘Asafa, you done your exercises?’ and I’d say: ‘Yes, coach,’ and then after I start doing them. Sometimes I’m training and I just want to go home and work on an engine. Sometimes I’ll be working on an engine and just miss practice. Or go to the beach. I know, I’m like a kid. Maybe I was a bit too spoilt growing up. Everything just came like I wanted it to.”
If he truly has been missing sessions like this I could see how things fall apart for him.
Like Kit-kat, I was also at the Stephen Francis seminar and he did say that they do acceleration development all-year round - lots of 30m runs - many with sled. (I was also fortunate enough to drive him from his hotel to Homebush that day and we luckily we got stuck in a lot of traffic!!). As a result I was able to ask a lot of questions, which he basically re-enforced at the seminar. He termed his training long to short because his endurance work started at longer intervals and progressively got shorter as it got quicker. I think at the seminar kit-kat mentioned that perhaps it was more concurrent to which I think he replied ‘I guess so’…He mentioned that he follows many of John Smiths principals and reads and talks to many so I think he is more knowledgable than some of the comments appear…
No.2 I’m surprised you’ve never come across any sprinters with an injured groin. I’ve seen quite a few sprinters strain their adductors during the acceleration phase. Adductor/groin injuries are notoriously slow to heal and difficult to rehab. Many times, once that part of the body has been injured, it will reoccur again and again.
Sad story. This might have been his last best shot at a global title. He has racked up a lot more milage than his main rivals with the exception of Gay, who is also struggling, his first WC was in 2003. Eight years (nine seasons) at the top is already exceptional.
how many gold medals in majors!!!