Actually…
Ext. Tempo --> Int. Tempo (if you want) --> SE’s (order depends on event)
Acc. Dev. --> MaxV --> Short Speed
Ext. Tempo - 100-600m, 30-90sec rest, 2000-3000m volume, 65-75%
Int. Tempo - 100-600m, 1-3min rest, 1000-2000m volume, 80-89%
SE - 60-150m, 10-15min, 300-900m volume, 90-100%
SE1 - 150-300m, 15-20min, 300-900m volume, 90-100%
SE2 - 300-600m, Full Recov., 1-2 reps, 90-100%
I think you know the different speed workouts. 
This thread bring up some interesting topics. As a high school coach, I know a great of percent of coaches do 4-5 mile runs with there sprinters on a weekly basis, sometimes twice a week. It is proven that long slow runs for a sprinter can a and absolutly no speed work, there most could be a intensive tempo workout with repeat 200’s. Thats what they do almost the whole year and classify it as “speed work”.ctually cause a sprinter to lose speed. Where I’m from a lot of athletes are not coached the right way, hey Charlie I bet you would have a good laugh if you read or found out about some of the training methods that High School Coaches use.
I’ve seen a lot over the years!
Actually long slow runs (aside from the shin splints!) are prob LESS of a killer to speed than the intensive tempo 200s, but it sure as hell doesn’t do anything good for them either.
so basically charlie, we highschoolers who haven’t ran 10.5 don’t do intensive tempos??? because from what you wrote, you don’t like intensive tempos…
I am wondering this also. General fitness must be improved, as you say. Extensive tempo is performed at a pace that can be maintained throughout the workout and volume is limited (a high limit, but still a limit). How are you to improve on this and other general fitness without a brief and monitored use of intensive tempo (maybe 2 or 3 sessions during early GPP)? Or is this all covered in CFTS (which I am getting this week, thank god)?
I don’t like intensive tempo and didn’t use it. It’s covered in the CFTS
That’s what I figured. Thank you.
sweeeeettt…
remember the bridge between gpp and spp should be very smooth…I think a lot of athletes get hurt in week two or three from the shift in week 1 of the SPP. Any other observations?
Clemson- what are you recommendations on this subject? How would you bridge between a GPP for a 100m runner above 10.5 into eventual SE runs in SPP?
I have worked with guys from 10.0s to 10.8s and found that the training should be blending. Charlie is master painter so his blending is with oils…lame guys like me are paint by number and use blue 8 to bridge 7 and 9.
I think the buffer zone between phases is longer for the lower level guys and perhaps more abrubt changes? Charlie?
All changes have to be subtle to avoid injury or stiffness.
Charlie, I think you have written on this site (and probably elsewhere as well) as to the superiority of extensive tempo over continuous tempo work as being related to negative “enzymatic?” changes that come about or something to that effect. I totally believe the extensive to be superior to the continuous running. Is there any literature/research which explains why this is so, from a physiological perspective? I’ve seen a kid do 3000m of tempo and then lift pretty well(though ideally the sequence would be reversed if one was forced to perform lifting and recovery work on the same day) and then watched the same individual on another day do an “easy two mile run” and the weight session that followed was pretty bad-and I’ve seen this pattern repeated with a few other kids. I know we have discussed ext. tempo vs. int. tempo on this site to a large degree and just wondered if you could elaborate on the differences between ext. and cont. tempo since the subject had been raised on this thread. Thanks.
Don’t really have any studies to say why. just did it- felt it.
Like you, I have seen the differences and the superiority of the the ext. vs the continuous and can’t really explain it. Perhaps the difference lies within the short rests between the runs whether it be walking or abs/push-ups which allows the body some type of positive intra-set recovery that has proven to be optimal or ideal that the continuous running does not permit. I don’t know-obviously.
Possible physiological reasons for extensive tempo being superior to continous runs for sprinters:
Tempo encourages running form that is more similar to sprinting technique. Steady state running is more flat footed, lower knee lift, shorter stride length.
Tempo running from my experience is run at levels that are more favourable to development of VO2 max. Steady state running develops the aerobic base level more. Sprinters are more likely to need the benefits of higher VO2 for their max oxygen uptake.
Try running tempo with a heart rate monitor and see the levels reached with tempo compared to say a steady 40 min run. I know this is mainly a sprinters board but check out some of the literature on distance running re aerobic/threshold/VO2 development. I guess some could be applied to 400m sprinters, not sure about 200m/100m types. Maybe that is where Clyde Hart is coming from in his development using tempo runs, ie improve VO2 max.
Charlie - ever tried heart rate monitors during tempo running ? Have you measured tempo speed to see if it correlates to athletes best 3000m time, considered the optimunm way to improve VO2 max ?
I’m not sure how much more extensive tempo enhances VO2 max than steady-state running, though it is more. Also heart-rate monitors don’t really tell you alot about sprinters, so I’d just stick with a time percentage for working speeds. The sprinter tends to accelerate the HR far more than a distance runner and never increases the stroke vol as much.
i read all of cfts yesterday and i have some questions:
Notice that insulin is at it’s lowest at 60% of VO2 Max…interesting that the calculates near the 75% intensity rule and why is this important crazy clemson? While more fat can be burned doing intervals…stimulating lipolysis is key for long term body comp since you want to rotate your fat pathways through vertical integration. Any increase of insulin with during workout formulas will harm that metabolic pathway. Supramaximal training will increase epi/norepin as well as GH and Insulin output but after warmdown they will fall very quickly as your training increases. I have been using the CFTS and forum review for a year now and notice that:
No beta cell blow out
No Adrenal Bankrupcy
No Cortisol Catastrophe
I use HR monitors for my quadrant circuit to monitor overtraining but not to precribe intensities
Everyone is saying why aren’t you doing super low aerobic work (30-40%) and tempo (75%) instead of intervals for cardio? I point to the all-american athletes and say " Long term sucess is slow but the peaks are higher. Treadmills are for gerbils."