If your running 11.7 your may point of emphasis should not be weightlifting it should be sprinting.
RJ24,
your right most of the benefit is in the first 10.
I just think its odd how much time is spent bettering that first 10 and not the other 90. I think if you have a slow start you might be able to make it up later since you spend a huge chunk of your energy in the first 10, if its great you must be spending a lot of energy. And if your a lower level athlete that probably means your wearing out at 50-70, so where does that get you?
Suffice it to say I disagree and arguing over a hypothetical wont get us anywhere, however this is starting to get a bit off the topic and I have done my fair share of side tracking topics so I will stop at this point, if you would like to know anymore of my thoughts on this just pm me.
i agree with Charlie on this one training for power and speed results in increases in strength simply because the both require similar motor patterns (high freq. rate coding, and motor unit recruitment). another thing is that weightlifting does not have to be performed as a slow movement of heavy weight. weights simply add difficulty to a movement the more weight you use the more efficient your system has to operate or atleast strive to operate to lift the weight. the focus in training should be explosive athleticism now if you do that on the track on a plyo-box or in the weight room the goal is not to lift more weight but to become faster and more explosive and as a result of gains in this area of physicality there is a concurrent gain in absolute strength.
Yes I saw images of the machine constructed for the training, it was like a sophisticated multi-hip machine. I think it’s more important to take on board the findings of the training rather than trying to replicate exactly the machinery used in the study. What seems to be important is the use of the correct methods for training.
You can see the patent PDF download, it has drawings of the machine used.
You need high levels so that you can prime the CNS (tonic effect) prior to competition. It is much more effective if you can call upon more than just sprinting itself to stimulate the CNS. High strength levels in the weight room allow or give you another dimension to conditioning the body prior to competition.
It seems that as the phosphates are depleted rapidly there reaches a point where glycolysis indirectly helps to re-synthesis ATP. The more glycolytic enzymes concentrated in the working muscle the greater the potential for muscle stiffness…
That’s a premise that’s actually not true. Studies that have been done looking at strength for the main phases of 100m (0-30, 30-60, 60-100) have shown that what predicts 0-30 (or shorter) performance best is not squats, but countermovement jumps, with bounds performing best at MaxV (30-60). For one strength workout, squats seem to perform better due not to the need for great strength in the first 10-30, but the need for relaxation in the last 40. I know that my own starts improved more from plyos than from squats.
If you don’t need large weightroom strength for the first 30, do you need it at all? Verkhoshansky argues that you don’t:
Finally, if the external resistance is insignificant (sprinting and hurdling), an even lower level of absolute strength is required.
From: Verkhoshansky, Y, “The Development of Special Strength in Power/Speed Events”
In fact, Verkhoshansky argues AGAINST overuse of absolute strength training in events that don’t need them.
What you need is POWER–the ability to apply strength quickly–and this is where the high absolute or limit strength have a problem for sprinters in that the effect of traing at high intensity–and this also applies to high intensity plyos–causes the muscle fibers to shift to more oxidative (i.e., slower) types, which causes slower SSC performance. Not good for sprinters.
If you don’t need the training that causes your fibers to contract slower, why mess with it?
This reminds me of the exchange on the Barry Ross thread where Anders, I believe, brought up some interesting points in a great series of posts:
He stated that the use, or possibly abuse, of high intensity plyos by many over in Europe could help explain their lack of success in the 100m opposed to their better showings indoors.
He also said that if he had the chance to work with another high level athlete, he would be tempted to use more hypertrophy methods because whatever was growing was sure to be fast twitch, or something along those lines.
This all seems to dovetail with what has been said above.
lkh, 0-30M is not 0-10M. Of course a CMJ would be a better predictor of 30M time than a squat, but I still believe a squat would be a better predictor of the first 10M amongst the athletic population (ie. someone who sprints regularly).
Also, it is nearly impossible to have a high CMJ without an adequate level of strength. Since there is so little energy coming into the system one cannot use (much) reactivity to get them airborn and so they must rely on concentric strength.
That’s not to say all athletes need to spend too much time in the weightroom, though. Some people are born with the levels of strength they need to succeed naturally and further training in that area would provide less results than it would for a naturally weaker person.
Strength training is the base for power sports. Do you mean resistance work? Strength training also includes plyometrics and other types such as ballistics (med ball) reflexive isometrics (vibration platform).
I think you mean resistance work (weight). It doesn’t have to be just resistance work. if you can develop outstanding ability in ballistic work or plyometry then I suppose it would be ok. Remember that the POTENTIAL to be explosive is very important. I am sure that there are sprinters who can not squat heavy but they have the ability to output that kind of power but it may seem as though they can’t simply because they have not embarked on a systematic resistance program.
There are a plethora of reasons,
Rate coding, ssc, RFD, explosive strength, increased size of individual muscle fiber, increase in testosterone and growth hormone…where do we stop?
Ahhh and hence why something is a predictor through correlation studies and not a cause aey
it is nearly impossible to have a high CMJ without an adequate level of strength
I disagree with that I have seen multiple basketball players at the highschool and college level with great cmj and couldnt squat 200 if their lives depended on it.
Strength training is the base for power sports. Do you mean resistance work? Strength training also includes plyometrics and other types such as ballistics (med ball) reflexive isometrics (vibration platform).
I think you mean resistance work (weight). It doesn’t have to be just resistance work. if you can develop outstanding ability in ballistic work or plyometry then I suppose it would be ok. Remember that the POTENTIAL to be explosive is very important. I am sure that there are sprinters who can not squat heavy but they have the ability to output that kind of power but it may seem as though they can’t simply because they have not embarked on a systematic resistance program.
I suppose semantics got the best of us then, I take strength training to mean resistance work used for strength purposes.
But the way you rephrased it then i guess we are in agreement.
I would guarantee you that within 2-3 weeks of strength training and learning how to squat they would be able to hit 1.5x BW.
Kelly Baggett has touched on this numerous times in the past. He’s never seen anyone with a legitimate CMJ (no combine cheating) of 35" who can’t squat 1.5x BW and can’t learn to do so within weeks. I’ve never seen anyone like this either.
Why would I train them to squat, I bet if I took the same person and they were under 6’6 I could train them to run 11.5 in a couple weeks. So why would I make them squat?
If its about max strength why are there 110lb high school girls running faster then 90% of the people on this forum?
If you re-read my first post to lkh then you would see I said, “That’s not to say all athletes need to spend too much time in the weightroom, though. Some people are born with the levels of strength they need to succeed naturally and further training in that area would provide less results than it would for a naturally weaker person.”
By reading that, you should take away that the squat is not important for all athletes and it would provide minimal increases to train them in it. The people with the potential to squat double BW within weeks are the one’s who should ignore the squat, because the horsepower is there already.
High school girls are hyooge. Angela Williams 11.11 in HS. I bet she squatted like 3x bw. She ran 12.85 when she was 10. Angela, squatting 3x bw when you’re 10 isn’t good for the growth plates. no wonder you’re 5’2