Very interesting, thank you.
Bumping this for anyone who wants to weigh in.
This is a comparison of the relative speeds for Dwain Chambers and Maurice Greene in the 1999 World Champs, based on split data.
Chambers in 1999 had the worst speed endurance Iāve ever seen - that 0.84 top 10 meter split was good enough to net Justin Gatlin a 9.77 last year. It gave Chambers a 9.97.
Greene, though known for his start, is still one of the best ever for maintaining speed.
They hit the same top speed but were a light year apart at the finish line. Why?
What did Smithās group do at training to make Greene so good at resisting decline? Iāve heard talks of some ridiculous HSI overdistance workouts - any reason to think these contributed? Or did the lower CNS output of these workouts allow them some ādown timeā in training so that they were able to bounce back and hit the next short session even harder?
Why was Chambers so poor? Just general disintegration of form based on seeing Greene on his shoulder? If so, why was he never able to really surpass the 9.97 (with his 9.87 PR coming with a max wind) if he could run that fast at top speed? Is the lack of speed endurance on Chambersā part genetic or training induced? Hereās an old discussion re: Chambersā early training that might have no bearing on these questions: http://community.charliefrancis.com/showthread.php?19789-Speed-endurance-the-key-to-all-11-12second-sprinters/page5
Thoughts?
1 Like
Dad Pfaff has indicated that Chamberās talent (power development) during start/acceleration is also his curse following max V.
This may be interpreted to suggest that his volitional muscle/mechanical efforts remain at the forefront and disturb the elastic/rhythmic qualities needed during speed endurance.
I cannot speak towards what Chamberās training has consisted of over the past 4-5 years; however, what Pfaff has stated about it deserves some consideration.
1 Like
Fascinating suggestion.
I wonder if Dwain has ADD? I do. For a lot of us it seems like we just canāt turn our brains off - ever.
Justin Gatlin does
As for the training of speed endurance:
- first off, the demand for it is predicated upon the sprinters existing alactic threshold. The longer the sprinter accelerates and the greater the max V the shorter the lactic period prior to the finish line and the less need for speed endurance
- for this reason, we know the need for stimulating max V is more and more important the faster the sprinter becomes as this is the difference maker and NOT speed endurance
- as for the training of speed endurance, which is more important in the developing years (speaking strictly of a 100m specialist) due to the fact that he/she will be reaching a lower magnitude max V sooner, simply putā¦the distance must at least be 100m
- regarding Chambers, if itās true that his power development becomes a problem later in the race than one argument, considering the fact that heās already gone 6.42 in the 60m, and in keeping with what I already stated and what we know about working toward oneās strengths, would be for him to continue working on max V and further extend his alactic threshold; thereby mitigating the need to increase the proportion of speed endurance training which, if he struggles with the reactive/elastic nature of it, will bear less impact on his 100m then extending the alactic threshold visa vis more max V work.
1 Like
Regarding Mo Greene/JohnSmith/HSI:
These are some lecture notes that Kebba Tolbert made from John Smithās presentation at a USATF clinic at the time Mo and Ato were on top. The way JS puts it is: Do a maximum effort start; Do another start holding back a little; The times are the same, but the energy consumption isnāt the same. That is what his whole system is aboutāmanaging energy. HSI does have SE/SE1 workouts, including 5X60+3X200 twice a week in indoor prep, but you wonāt see much in the way of ridiculous overdistance (Bob Kersee does that). But they hold back a little at the start, and they manage relaxation at the end, and you will see these workouts in the notes below:
Regarding speed endurance:
(1) It has been in the physiology literature since the early 1990ās that all systems turn on immediately after you start. There really isnāt an alactic threshold, although the glycolytic system gets cranked up slowly. At 5 seconds into a sprint the glycolytic energy component is 20-30% and 50% at 10 seconds. So guys like Charlie and John Smith really arenāt crazy for doing special endurance in indoor prep. See http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/905612 for a good overview. Iām not saying that you donāt want to expand the alactic window with sprints of less than 8 seconds with full recovery Charlieās way, or that you donāt want to train to manage energy John Smithās way, but there is a reason to do special endurance during indoor prep and later.
(2) Charlie once posted that āspeed endurance is best developed in races.ā If you look up Caryl Smith-Gilbertās last presentation at USTFCCCA, she has about a 6 week phase labelled āheavy drive phaseā, with speed (including depth jumps) following this, then speed plus special endurance in precomp for about 6 weeks. After this is racing about every week and the speed endurance (NOT SE1) comes from the racing. Andre De Grasse had a HUGE racing schedule and he improved almost every meet, it seems. If you do it this way, you donāt do pure SE (8-15 second) in training at all: You do a whole bunch of races, including a bunch of 200s.
http://www.ustfccca.org/assets/symposiums/2014/Sprints-SmithGilbert-2014.pdf
(3) Thereās a fairly famous quote on this site from Angella Issajenko that āBenās secret was that he refused to do long SE.ā And when Charlie said that Ben did 2X200 in phase III, he actually did 2X150. Iāve found this to be useful advice (provided youāre not doing l-s). Since production of ATP by glycolytic means seems to top out in the 15-20 second range, I specifically target that range, not longer.
1 Like
Nice post IKH
As for no alactic threshold, what has also been long since present in the literature (for what itās worth) is the fact that itās much more a matter of proportionality/contribution and from that perspective we know the proportion of alactic vs lactic vs aerobic contribution differs greatly based upon distance (provided intensity is maximized throughout). For this reason, it is very useful to distinguish the proportionality/contribution based upon thresholds, or select your preferred colloquialism, (which technology such as the Omegawave does from a diagnostic standpoint).
We also know that a greater proportion of training load volume/intensity spent on any particular bioenergetic system will expand the upper limit of itās contribution towards the effort thus the proportion of itās contribution is increased and the threshold that distinguishes the proportional contribution between adjacent systems is also shifted.
Iāll surely concede that it is futile to debate, particularly regarding colloquialisms, so suffice it to say that the longer the distance over which the sprinter is able to accelerate, and reach a higher max V, the greater the proportion of alactic contribution and the lesser the remaining distance under which the growing lactic contribution yields greater physiologic stress.
1 Like
lkh and James: thank you.
lkh: First, thanks for the HSI lecture note. I donāt remember where I heard about the crazy special endurance work, but it was on the order of everyone running multiple 600s.
Could you expand on how the glycotic contributions early in a sprint are affecting the actual performance?
Whatās going on at the cellular, nervous, or muscular level when glycogen is starting to come into the picture 20-30% five seconds into a run?
And how that translates into doing special endurance work when prepping for 60s?
This indoor season, we did Charlieās descending ladder 60 setup (from Inside the SPP), starting with 10x60 with minimal rest down to 2x60 the week before the meet. Unfortunately, the other short sprints guy got sick and couldnāt compete in our meet. However, I surprised myself and got into the final - where I pulled up injured.
Anyway, the 60s in the early part of the SPP really were more like split runs with the short breaks. And I was curious as to what exactly Charlie was getting out of having split runs so early in the season.
These SE-type workouts morph into lower-volume, higher intensity workouts as the SPP continues - fewer 60s, you accelerate for longer. Itās almost like a long-to-short embedded in the short-to-long.
Anyway, just probing you on how the SE work aids or does not aid shorter stuff.