The spring mass model is an effective model for sprinters. Making unsubstantial claims against it is contrary to the overwhelming consensus in biomechanics. The question should be centered on what are the applications of the model to sprint training. The arguments going back and forward at this stage does not deal with the most meaningful question.
There is this nice little site called google where you can look up what words mean. When you do you will see that oversimplifying does not mean that it makes every observation totally illegitimate, just some.
The difference between correlation and causation are separate entities that are consistently misunderstood.
Concepts of general v specific strength training protocols may be false classifications. Body building lifts have the assumption that the lifts are absent from power, however this is not the case. Cheating by using momentum is common in BB this in turn involves more power output. Therefore it becomes clearer that BB lifts are not that general of lift for sprinters.
Previously: The question should be centered on what are the applications of the model to sprint training. The arguments going back and forward at this stage does not deal with the most meaningful question.
Good points, as well as the difference between correlation/causation! Thanks.
That is perhaps drawing a conclusion that there is not data to support. The spring model is accepted in biomechanics for running at speed. One of the major issues raised is that the portion of the sprint cycle directly explained by the sprint model represents a relative small portion of the sprint cycle, and even that portion is in fact a DEPENDENT variable–determined by how long you can accelerate. In addition, there are a number of independent variables uncorrected in the study:
(1) The extent to which a talented sprinter (particularly in drive phase mode as in Mo or Asafa) is going to keep his head down an accelerate for roughly half the distance of the race and the extent to which the effect of this motion is NOT explained by the spring mass model.
(2) The extent to which the effective acceleration period is increased by possessing GREATER amounts of mass (as would be true in Ben, Mo, Asafa) than the concept of mass specific force would imply.
(3) The extent to which a higher Max V which implies a higher mass specific force is dependent on having the greater amount of mass in order to reach that higher Max V.
(4) The extent to which a LOWER mass specific force results in faster times in the last third of the race. Do you run your fastest by pushing as hard as you can after the 60 meter point? No, you RELAX and consciously do not push for more speed (power, force) in order to run faster.
(5) The extent to which the conclusions might be different if expressed in terms of explosive power rather than msf. Consider that Ben’s max squat is almost DOUBLE Mo’s. By the study, you would conclude that Ben is much faster. Yet they ran the same time. Similiarly, PLs and OLs competing in weight classes, with greater msf than sprinters should win sprint races–and they do…all the way out to 10 meters, when those uncorrected independent variable begin to take effect.
In conclusion, Charlie Francis, John Smith, Bobby Kersee, and the others are not stupid.
4: Don’t understand your point. Relaxation does not imply lower forces in the required direction.
5:Weights may be a reflection of power rather than it’s cause. just because Mo didn’t squat as much doesn’t mean he couldn’t if that was his focus in training.
Scroll down to NumberTwo’s post. It seems Mo could/can squat full depth 400+.
http://www.charliefrancis.com/community/showthread.php?p=118333&highlight=greene+squat#post118333
I don’t believe anyone has the intent to imply that JS, CF or BK are stupid. This discussion is going smooth, let’s keep it that way.
The spring mass model represents support, drive & flight phases of sprinting. According to the model the flight phase is largely passive and ground contacts are active. In reality the model does represent one portion of the sprint cycle.
The Law of inertia tells us that acceleration is not possible during the flight phase. Conservation of angular momentum can maintain angular velocity, keeping your knees & feet up. Essentially velocity is decreasing through the flight phase by friction.
The spring mass model can be successfully integrated into all portions of the sprint cycle. When it is related to the overall laws of motion it does provide a broad perspective of sprinting technique.
For point number 5, powerlifters and olympic lifters may be stronger than the sprinters you mentioned, but their mass specific force is not as great. That increase in strength may allow them to accelerate faster to the 10m mark or whatever distance is quoted in the study you reference. MSF is not needed during that phase of the run (refer to bear’s earlier post). When MSF does become the focus of the race, the sprinters pull away quickly from the lifters. MSF is not how much weight you can lift. I do not recall off the top of my head Bear’s exact definition. Maybe he can share that with us again.
Bear does “cycling” as his periodization. I will let him describe that further if he chooses.
I am a little confused why you or anyone else would be worried about overtraining on his protocol. Many people on this site follow CF’s protocols to increase their speed. No one seems to argue or believe that it will lead to overtraining (at least it is not mentioned very often), yet the weight and track volumes are much greater than Bear’s.
This is interesting as well…Food for thought as usual! In the CFTS you mention thats its impossible to definitevely say if strength gains in the weight room lead performance gains or they actually follow them ,thus rendering weights as a tool to merely express your current levels of power, which could have been developed through another high stimulus training means. I mean if you are running sub10 times, clearly the force is there. Even if the case with the weights is the latter, weights are not useless since they are a tool to handle your CNS resources and peak your speed in the right time… .
Is my thinking correct?
I forgot to add to my list regarding functional hypertrophy work/upper body work (actually total body athletic-based strength training):
As a first thing I want to achive is to create ATHLETES out of mine players/athletes and then second soccer players/sprinters/bb players/you name it!
Most of the athletes are ‘specificially’ prepared but they lack ‘general’ strength and conditioning which ultimately results in training platoue (lucky) or injuries (bad scenarion).
This may lead toward using only ‘specific’ general strength exercises, while avoiding ‘non-specific ones’. In sprinting this may be using only squats, DL and avoiding presses, pull-ups, rows, single leg work…
Well, I think you are partially right. As well as express your current power level, the high stimulus there (on a different part of the F/T curve) sets the stage for higher expressions on the next speed session, which sets the stage for a higher weights performance, which… and round and round…
But, if you’ve palteaued, you need a high stimulus for speed that does NOT further tax the specific muscles most needed for the sprinting, making upper body lifts like the bench more useful.
oh i get it now… i see.
Thats makes sense (now i have the whole picture in my mind!).
I like your kinda abstract way of thinking! props!
I guess this make sense on the elite level, where gain/risk ratio is somewhat different than on lower levels…?
The previous insight on strength gains in the weight room as leading to peformance gains, or following them, thus rendering weights as a tool to current levels of power, is an excellent one, as was Charlie’s response.
This issue came up at Dr. Weyand’s '02 seminar, where he noted that the strength implications might be complicated. Two factors
are critical for speed: 1) how much force, 2) how rapidly the runner can apply force. Neither factor can be ignored.
The rate of force development is a signficant issue to consider. One of the key issues arising from the seminar was how best to influence RFD. As Weyand observed, “Fruitful potential approaches, in my opinion, would include plyometrics and perhaps some iron work. The correct combination, once empirically established, would constitute a speed program that should generalize from HS kids to the elites.”
In other words, we’re all still in the hunt for what program is most effective for the level of athlete we train, and the talent those athletes bring to the track.
I would turn the statement the other way around, working from either end of the F/T curve, minimizing conflict and working towards the middle according to the individuals athlete’s tolerance.
[QUOTE=Goose232]The deadlift is over rated. Pavel tsatsouline brought back its popularity for ‘athletic’ training.
Don’t let Linda Schaefer, the deadlift diva, hear that!
Regarding the issue of acceleration and leg spring functioning at top speed:
The tendons continue to function as springs running up and downhill or accelerating or decelerating. They really have to due to their material make-up and the anatomy of the limbs.
Researchers simply cannot model running and limbs as springs under conditions other than steady-speed level running, and there is a good deal remaining to be worked out on the mechanical function of limbs under these other
conditions. Any time a muscle generates force, the tendon must be loaded to transmit the force to the bone.
Every muscular contraction pulls on a tendon in order to move or exert force on the bone, every pull stretches, and every stretch stores energy that is released later. The steps in acceleration also load the tendons and involve
elastic storage. This is what occurs at top end speed, and in this respect what occurs during acceleration is not that different.
The training protocol we follow (with DLs, plyos, and high speed running via the ASR tables) all train the extensors. Based upon anatomy and limb action during acceleration, the extensors have to do all of the pushing-off responsible for accelerating the body. In other words, the same extensors used for top end running are the same ones that accelerate the body. In that regard, improving mass specific force almost certainly will improve acceleration ability as well. Acceleration occurs in accordance with f=ma (here the f is horizontal). So the best way to get more acceleration is more force with the same or less mass. Acceleration or steady speed does not matter. Increasing mass-specific force will improve both.
The key point that surfaced from the ’02 seminar, and re-emerged in Barry’s often lengthy discussions with Dr. Weyand: regardless of acceleration or steady speed, sprinting performance is determined essentially entirely by the m-s forces the extensor muscles apply to the ground. This is why Barry and I have developed the lift/plyo/high speed run program the way we have. It targets these muscles to get stronger without adding mass and we’re able to translate the strength gains into the rapid force application to the ground.
I’m not, by any means, suggesting this is the “Holy Grail” of speed training, nor would I ever criticize, challenge, or debate the merits of any other protocol that has produced results. I’m just offering why we’re doing what we’re doing, simply because, as a few more of Barry’s articles appear on other sites and forums, readers have had some questions.
Now back to HS cross country for me!