I’ve seen a lot of Bulgarian Training Principles explored lately and its application to other sports - sprinting here on this site and throwing on other sites. I agree that if you want to apply these concepts to your lifting that the rest of your training should be of the same philosophy so that the whole training organism operates harmoniously and complements one another (I remember Charlie suggesting that Ben’s lifting was enhanced by his sprinting and vice versa the latter being obvious of course).
One thing I want to throw out there for consideration. It has been demonstrated with the available knowledge that the Bulgarian weightlifters experienced a lot of success training with low volume sessions repeatedly throughout the day at intensities above 90% in very few training exercises. Charlie’s training principles seem to reflect that as well - the need to train at maximum for only as long as the body’s ability to sustain that level. On one hand it is demonstrated that the Bulgarians train at maximum multiple times per day day after day. Recovery methods, drugs (possible), nutrition and lifestyle aside does this mean that sprinting/lifting/plyos could occur multiple times at low volume sessions throughout the day day after day? What about Charlie’s (not solely his of course) rule of minimum 48 hours recovery for CNS?
Lets consider the fact that weightlifting (Bulgarian style with only 1 or 2 reps) is a single effort activity - acyclic. Sprinting on the other hand is a multiple effort activity that is at least (shortest distances) 3-4 times longer of an activity than a snatch or clean (I’m being conservative - right now I dont have the actual execution times; maybe someone can offer that info) - in short a cyclic activity. Does cyclic activity (even as short as 3-4 sec long) stress the CNS more than a 1 rep set of cleans or snatches? Does this explain the discrepancy between training programs?
If so maybe a middle road can be reached where the benefits of both styles can be reaped. What about this:
Monday
9-10 AM Olympic Lifts
11-12 PM Accel Work
4-5 PM Top Speed Work
5:30-6:30 Limit Strength Work
Tuesday
1 session: Tempo Runs, Trunk Strength, Hurdle Mobility
Wednesday
9-10 AM Olympic Lifts/MB
10:30-11 Limit Strength Work
3-4:30 Accel Work, MB, Special Edurance
Thursday
1 session: Tempo Runs, Trunk Strength, Hurdle Mobility
Friday
Repeat Monday maybe with more accel runs, speed endurance (40-60-80m)
Saturday
Tues and Thursday repeat
Multiple short sessions on hard days but 48 hours til the next hard day. Of course times can be adjusted. What do you think?
In my mind, the most accurate way to ‘replicate’ the Bulgarian Model within sprinting parameters, would be to try and match duration/volume/intensity.
So, similar to what you referenced, with respect to duration of spints in seconds, you might construct a couple of different drills which are of very short duration (starts/first 10, flying sprints of 1-2 seconds, etc)
In order to combine multiple sessions per day, of both lifting and sprinting, volumes will obviously have to be cut for both training means.
So, if duration/volume/and intensity are accurately matched, it stands to reason that the training protocol would be effective. In, the end, it is not so much the training stimulus, as it is the toll it takes on the CNS/neuromuscular system.
One thing to keep in mind wrt: the Bulgarians is that they are only training at a daily/workout/training (and unpsyched at that) max (as opposed to the Soviets who base %ages on competition max). Basically, they work up to an unpsyched max for that session and then perform sets at or slightly (5-10 kg as I understand) below. Meaning that on days when they are fatigued, the load is automatically lessened by their inability to lift the same weight.
But this raises an interesting question: Simmons contends that working the same movement at >90% for more than 3 weeks leads to CNS burnout, loss of strength, etc? More accurately: he claims Soviet research demonstrated this. This is the rationale for rotating ME exercises every so often.
I have performed quite a few searches for current Bulgarian training parameters, in the past, and have not really come up with anything other than what CT outlines in his book.
Maybe David W could shed some light on the subject, as he is a proponent of the Bulgarian coach (I won’t try and spell his name from memory)
I’ve tried it at one point in my training life. But thats when I knew nothing about training. So sprinting competition distances at 100% was the only logical method I had in mind. After 6 months of daily repeat of 100s at 100% I dropped about 1.2 seconds of my 100m time.
This bring up an interesting point, how does the CNS of sprints compare to lifts?
3x at 100% distance for 6 days seems like CNS suicide in a lot of ways. How does one prevent CNS burnout from this? Or in other words, how is this not what sprinters used to do when no one knew about CNS fatigue? Not meaning to step on anyone’s toes, but i think these questions should be addressed.
CNS stress has two dimentions- height AND breadth (duration/distance) and sprinting tends to have more breadth than lifting, and should require more recovery for a given intensity level. On the other hand, even maximal speed sprinting may consist of a coordinated series of slightly sub-maximal actions, so direct comparisons are extremely difficult.
The only safe ground I could ever find was to keep the speed componant as the principle consideration and therefore all other componants secondary, adjusted according to the effect on the speed componant.
This brings up another can of worms that I don’t think we’ve really addressed much. That is, the introduction of speed to the program during a volumization period, particularly with a short to long program. Questions:
1: How do you decide on the speed to be used in the beginning?
2: If the vol is to be fairly high ( 240m of short accels + 4 x [4 x 60] for a total vol of 1200m in a session, as it might be with a mid-level sprinter with a good background but not quite world-class performances), the speed level possible to handle the volume might be less of an indicator of CNS fatigue. Would you then start off with weights as your principle CNS fatigue indicator? If so, when would you switch to speed as the principle indicator- later in the GPP or at the beginning of the SPP?
I think its’s a good question and probably represents the difference.
A single lift lasts a fraction of a second and while it may be intensive to the CNS, it is non-extensive. Couple this with perhaps less of an eccentric and you have fundamantally different (although superficially similar) activities: 1 rep of an OL vs. a sprint of varying durations. There are also metabolic characteristics that are different which may be having an impact.
Now it might be possible to perform starts or some exceedingly short sprints on a Bulgarian schedule but (as someone absolutely not well versed in sprint training) impossible to do anything longer. As Charlie mentions below, there is height and breadth (which I take to mean intensive and extensive, more or less) stress on the CNS. A max OL might have more height of CNS stress but less breadth (it’s over fast), the sprint the converse.
I think I mentioned this elsewhere but, for whatever it’s worth, a recent issue of Milo (recent = in the last few years) pointed out that the current Bulgarian coach has gone back to more traditional OL training styles. Longer workouts, percentage based, more assistance work. Cites burnout, lifter injury and such under the Abadjaev system.
At the same time, it is my understanding that other countries (Cuba I beleive) still use a modified Abadjaev system, working to a daily max and then performing sets in that range.
perhaps if nothing else it points that there are many ways to reach the same end goal.
It’s high, but not extremely so, especially at a controlled pace, such as 25+maintain or 30+maintain. as it must be sub-max, then the question is- what do you monitor and when do you shift the emphasis?
Once you build up to a volume max then a simple example might look something like this, over a number of weeks.
accels + 4 x [4 x 60]
accels + 3 x [4 x 60]
accels + 2 x [4 x 60]
etc, with increasing velocities, obtained by progressively longer accels and breaks between runs and sets.
A more advanced sprinter, with better developed speed might build as follows:
accels + 3 x [4 x 60]
accels + 3 x [3 x 60]
accels + 2 x [3 x 60]
You’ve stated several times that in 1987 Ben had done over 60,000 meters worth of speed work. Since Ben was world class athlete, and therefore may not be able to tolerate as much stress on the CNS as say an 11.00 runner, would you consider taking the volume even higher than that with an intermediate level athlete with a good general fitness background? If so how high?
It’s very possible to go higher, especially if the program is long to short and the athlete is mature. when spread over the many months, the actual average session vol is not that high.