“Charlie often makes the point that it is difficult to extrapolate from the training of a single world class athlete. If they are the world record holder, then they are a sub-set of one. If they were the same as every other athlete, then they would not be the world record holder! This is the difficulty: how do we extract (from small sample sizes) what is generally applicable for other athletes or even athletes at different levels of development? Charlie’s system does this, but the fact that Ben Johnson ran a 9.7 does not PROVE that his system is optimal for all sprint training. Read it, understand it and come to your own conclusions.”
Charlie, Dan, John, and others found ways and common variables that overlap…sure they might be orchestrated differently but many principals stay the same…I don’t care if it is grass tempo runs followed by waldemar or strength circuits followed by Mark…training is training.
XLR8-when have I used one athlete as a case study to extrapolate everything? I use sample sizes…hence case S-T-U-D-I-E-S. Read it and understand it. Volume is volume, be it medball work with MJ, pillar work with Donovan, or high reps with Desai. I try to look at all the various programs to see what overlaps. If a concept does overlap it must be effective…this sorting of programs is vital.
“CF’s system makes sense to me and the success he has had with his athletes lends credibility and ensures that it can be applied in practice (many theories sound great on paper and break down in the real-world.) I find his principles to resonate with me so that is good enough for my training.”
Strange how theory is no longer hip now? You do need both but I am glad you are back to us.
“However, it seems to me that many roads lead to Rome (or Athens and you will find that the athletes lining up for the 100m final there will have all followed different training paths on their way.”
Sure…that’s why they don’t give out 8 gold medals! Each path IS different.
Sounds like you are agreeing with me…not proof, but trends and overlaps that point you in the right direction.
Strange how theory is no longer hip now? You do need both but I am glad you are back to us.
I never said you don’t need theory. As a matter of fact, I find that if I don’t have the theory or don’t understand the theory, then I won’t buy the program. I don’t go for the ‘do it because I said so’ school of coaching.
I agree with the above - he has a good point here -
(Incidently I don’t know he was specifically making a point to you Clemson)
But for those jumping to conclusions about the SPECIFICS of Ben or MJ’s training programs, the above holds true … one win - even at the Olympics doesn’t necessarily prove or disprove anything.
Best example of this is last summer in Paris - every young sprinter who said “since yer man Kim Collins doesn’t lift I’m not going to”.
I have to admit my own beliefs on ab work are confused…
I always thought isometric and max strength work would benefit the abs more however I take Charlies point on board and now do higher reps …
With my current program … often if I don’t do abs (whether Hi-Int. or Low-Int.) as part of my tempo session - abs don’t get done at all … so I’d rather do them than not!
Incidently for many game or team sport athletes the tranverse abdominus sheet of ab muscles behind the 6-pack are a greatly ignored muscle.
This is a seriuos mistake since the influence these phasic muscles have on not only rotation and posture but groin injuries is critical.
Austrailian AFL and UK soccer teams have only recently begun to try and avoid overworking the outer 6-pack and try now to prehab the interioir wall.
Groin injuries could be the costliest injury in such sports rather than hamstrings very soon.
“Sounds like you are agreeing with me…not proof, but trends and overlaps that point you in the right direction.”
This info is rather clear…and yes and research be in the lab or on the track shows what variables are at play. Proof is in the chocolate grow pudding. Overlap are common means or concepts that are shared and proven to be a part of a winning program. Trends are patterns of observation that can range from simple chemistry to advanced physiology.
“As a matter of fact, I find that if I don’t have the theory or don’t understand the theory, then I won’t buy the program.”
Some coaches don’t have time to sip chai tea and come up with elaborate training theories…patterns of success and good sport science. Let the writers come up with the explanations…
Can someone please expand on this, i.e. what is the function of the tranverse abdominus sheet, and what excercises are being used to train it. Particularly in regards to groin injuries.
I’m curious: What exercises “work” the TA? Are you talking about “drawing in work”?
McGill has his new book out. I am waiting for some reviews before I pick it up. He seems to have some innovative ideas regarding core stabilization for performance.
That’s fine, and it works for many athletes…just not for me. However, I think that the great coaches do spend the time to think about the patterns and then over time evolve them into overall training theories. Charlie has certainly done this!
It doesn’t have to be elaborate. As a matter of fact, I’d say the more esoteric the coach sounds, the more likely that he’s full of BS. The trick is taking all of the complexity (generated by case studies and science) and finding a way to make it understandable, useful and practical so that it can be applied to a wide range of athletes.
What does my plan have to do with any of this? I’m following the CFTS to the best of my knowledge and ability. If it’s not working then are you going to say that my case study PROVES that Charlie’s system doesn’t work?
And your disclaimer not withstanding, your comment clearly is meant as a flame. In any case, I have run a 4.505 automatic time (if you subtract the 0.25 to turn it into a hand time, you’ll see that’s not so lame.)
…and I’d love to see video of your run. Talk is cheap.
Look at your posts over the last few months…all arguements and very little solutions besides the combine thread…I must have touched a nerve for you to loose your cool ----but realize after watching your video last year you do have .2 more speed in you. What I am saying is your plan could be better and you have better genetics. You can’t compare the gifts of club coaching and financial support I have had in my past.
I will be the first to man up and realize I was at fault with the poor tone.
OK, fair comment, and it has been discussed at great length.
That said, working with a broad spectrum of sprinters up to WR holders does give you an insight into the effects of various types, ratios, and timing of work, even though you reject my conclusions here as “worthless”.
Why do you conclude that tempo, also low intensity, high rep, and of longer duration, is different?
As the hundreds of daily ab reps are dropped, do you replace them with other work?
If not- why not?
If so- with what?
mr francis ive read tom tellez’s book with leroy burrel. apparenly they always prefer explosive sit ups ie through use of med balls and thats actually wat i do. i do like 3 sets of 20abs with med ball and thats it for me.
adrian faccioni i read also said that the age of doing 100s of sit ups per day is extinct. and that a variety of workouts are necessary to get ’ the whole thing’ in shape if you now wat i mean.
so does mr francis do high abdominal reps to his athletes all the way through gpp to pcp. or does it change somehow when its time to run fast.
wat about incline sit ups, wat about sit ups with weights, crunches etc
so do we do high reps of all these or shorter reps with a good mix of workouts?
That was losing my cool?!?! The only nerve you touched is the one where you are always calling guys out for what have they run or who have they trainined when it has nothing to do with the argument at hand.
----but realize after watching your video last year you do have .2 more speed in you. What I am saying is your plan could be better and you have better genetics.
Agreed. However, that run at the combines is not a fair representation insofar as it was run on a wet field into a 3-4mph headwind. Couple that with the technique issues that you pointed out (I’ll note that you didn’t give me any suggestions on how to correct them but I’ve been working on them to the best of my ability nonethless) and I agree that 0.2 faster is quite reasonable.
I’m always ready to listen to any suggestions you or anyone else has as far as improving my training. If you are willing to contribute, I will put up my current (pre-season) training plan and we can start from there. Let me know.
I will be the first to man up and realize I was at fault with the poor tone.
Some go extinct more slowly than others!
As for low intensity- high reps moving to higher intensity lower reps- WHY?
Think about this for a minute. As you move to ever higher intensity in the key area- SPEED WORK, you have to continue to create the conditions for the advancement of speed work in an ever more challanging environment - ever greater recovery, and spreading, and/or reducing, competing CNS stress. How does this fit with moving the abs from low stress to high stress as the meets approach?
It is possible, of course, to use explosive med ball work, which includes ab related axercises during the GPP phase, with the numbers of power moves reducing in number as speed work demands increase- operating in the same way as the weights in the maintenance phase, as any specific power requirements for the abs must already be in place.
High-rep Ab work, like tempo, fills a lower intensity supporting role- certainly not a competing one.
Very nice reply and explanation. It’s always good to hear this again and again, as it makes the whole process of preparing an peaking an athlete so much easier to comprehend and implement (i.e. makes perfect sense).
ok while ballistic abs may seem better, im going to chime in and say what charlie has been said. The CNS only has so much to give, and as a sprinter you want that to go towards sprinting. The more you take from the CNS the longer it takes to recover and thus less frequent sprinting sessions or poorer quality once. We use other methods of training for other body parts, directed at the CNS. The role of the abs is an isometric one, requiring much endurance to hold isometrically for proper force transferrance and to hold a proper sprint positions when other body parts are tired…All movements originate from the core as its the stablizer of all movements…And going back to the first point, low intensity high rep work is a way to work the abdominals in an appropriate manner(endurance as a support role) without taking away from the CNS pool. It all comes down to where you put your priorites for CNS usage. And dont bash charlie for his use of athletes hes trained as it is just a showing of what he has tried throughout the years and what has been optimal for all those who he had worked with…As well with heavy weight training to develop the other end of the force velocity curve, along with plyo, there isnt much left(at least so one could recover appropriately) to work the abs in a manner draining on the CNS when they can be worked in a virtually non CNS intensive way much more effectively?
and you will find that the athletes lining up for the 100m final there will have all followed different training paths on their way.”
