Hello,
I got the Elite Concepts to help me plan and program for my sports training(Ultimate Frisbee). I’ve started to read through the first part, Structure of Sprint Training, and have come upon the discussion of Short to Long in the “Forum” part of the writing. I am thoroughly confused by a part of the writing. I hope Charlie doesn’t mind that copy part of the writing and paste it in here.
Honestly, I am so confused by this that I’m not even sure where to start with my questions. Could someone give me a concrete workout example of this concept in action?
After reading this over and over, this is my rough understanding. I’m going to use a 150 M run as an example. In the Short to Long approach, I would mentally approach the 150 M run as two parts. 1) a max acceleration component for say 20 M(should it be more? Less?), then 2) maintain whatever speed I can for the last 130 M. I doubt I will be able to maintain the speed generated from my 20 M acceleration so am I correct to assume I will naturally decelerate over the remaining 130M even though I try to maintain ? So in this approach, in this particular workout rep, I got to work on max acceleration and speed in the first 20 M AND also endurance by trying to carry it through the remaining 130 M?
If using the Long to Short approach for this same 150 M run, I would mentally consider it as just one continous run. I would accelerate up to a speed that I can maintain for 150 M. This would mean I did not accelerate maximally in the beginning of this run. Is this the difference between the Long to Short & Short to Long approach for this one particular 150 M run in my example?
Also, What is Special Endurance referring to? I can’t find a definition of it in the Structure of Spring Training guide. Thanks for reading and your help.
[i]Think of long-to-short and short-to-long as acting along a speed curve, moving
up then down again. So you could work on accels out to 20 and then use accel to
20 + maintain, generating enough speed to break the world record in the 600m,
then 30m accel + maintain to break the WR in the 400m, 40 + maintain for the
200m, accel as far a possible, up to 60m for the 100 WR.
So you can see you can work on Speed and SE at the same time with either
approach. The diff is that with L to S you work on accels only out to the distance
you’ll use for the SE at any given time, while with the S to L approach, the accels
are worked on beyond the distance you use for SE (for example accels out to
40m, but 30m + maintain for serial reps over 60m) Thus speed is developed
ahead of SE.
First, speed endurance is eventually done, but it is done after the required speed
level is in place (perfected in alactic conditions). Thus, the speed endurance is
superior in quality to that which could have been done earlier.[/i]
You can emphasize acceleration and work some endurance at the same time by
accelerating up to the distance you’re ready for and maintaining for the planned
distance. If you do the reps at the exact distance you accelerate to, it’s likely that
endurance will predominate, but, obviously, you can work acceleration to 30 or
40m and work longer with a shorter acceleration (20m + maintain for example).
[i]In both programs, acceleration and speed end are developed from the beginning
and acceleration distances are used to control the speed of execution.
With the long-to-short approach, the main emphasis is on longer runs, so accel
vols start off a bit lower and tend to be concentrated on accel distances needed
for the speed required, ie 20m accel is adequate for any level of 600m run
required (20m accel + maintain).
With the short-to-long approach, the initial accel vols are higher and tend to run
slightly longer than required for the speed end runs at any given time, ie accels
out to 30m simultaneous to speed end runs of 60m, performed as 20m accel +
40 maintain[/i]