Re Fibre Type
Is it a shock that the body can adapt to demand? As a sprint coach, I was counting on it! As for the motor neurons, they can be made more effective by lowering their electrical resistance by heating them through increased local blood supply (capillary density). This is why, perhaps counter-intuitively, 65% of our running volume was low intensity. As well as enhancing capillary density, this interspersing of low intensity training allowed the volume and frequency of high intensity work to be lowered to level that could allow for the continual, and, ultimately, extreme intensification that could bring these changes about.
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: sprintcoach2
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 5:02 AM
Subject: [Supertraining] Re: Muscle fibre transformation
“Rickard Andersson” <swe_power@h…> wrote:
<"The aim with the first phase of the training program is to
transform the type 1 fibres (which are endurance profiled) into the
more explosive type 2A fibres. When this phase is completed the
training changes direction with the aim to transform type 2A fibres
into the strongest type of fibres, namely type 2X"I like to know if
this is even possible. Can one type of muscle fibre
transform into another? >
I’m not an expert in this area, as a sprintcoach I find the topic
extremely interesting though. Transformation of fiber types still
seem to be one of the most disputed issues in exercise physiology.
Professor Bengt Saltin and his group at the Copenhagen Muscle
Research Centre has in the last couple of years done some great work
in this area. Their work seem to indicate that fibers are much more
plastic than we perhaps believed in the past (at least on a molecule
level).
It seems like a undisputed fact that most (all?) types of resistance
training are pushing MHCIIX towards IIA and the only stimuli that
really changes the different MHC proteins towards a faster character
is rest.
There are several studies indicating the same thing showed with
ordinary ATPase staining as well.
To change type I to IIX through IIA might seam appealing but I can’t
really see how it can be practically done. Remember to that it is
highly unlikely that the nerve supplying the fiber ever will change
its character. I small alfa-motor neuron is and will stay a low
threshold motor neuron, no matter how you are training.
I don’t know if it essential with a great IIX population in the
muscles of a powerlifter. Even elite weightlifters seems to do well
with mainly IIA.
Suggested reading, start with:
Myosin heavy chain IIX overshoot in human skeletal muscle.
Andersen JL & Aagaard P Muscle Nerve 2000 Jul 23:1095-104
All the best
Håkan Andersson
Sundsvall, Sweden
Dear Henk:
I though I’d get a rise out of somebody with this proposition, though I wasn’t sure if you would reply. (For those on the list who aren’t familiar with the sprint scene, Henk is one of the world’s leading authorities on sprinting, having coached Merlene Ottey, among others.)
First, I agree that speed and power work are paramount in the development of sprinters and that low-intensity work (runs at 75% of best time or slower) is, in large part, a form of active recovery between explosive sessions, but I don’t think it’s the only role it plays.
21 years ago, I worked with Dr Joseph Cywinski, The Director of Medical Engineering at the Harvard Medical Centre and President of the American Society of Electrical Engineers, creating muscle stimulating equipment and protocols for their use. Dr. Cywinski was, arguably, the worlds leading expert on EMS, with over 200 patents, and, while still in Poland, developed EMS equipment for Soviet National teams as early as 1952. During the course of our work, he explained why subjects receiving maximal EMS exhibited stronger contractions on reps 3 through 6 or 7 (out of 10x10sec contractions with 50sec rest) without any change in input. Increases in temperature, due to increased blood flow, lowered electrical resistance. The implication was intriguing.
Now, I’ll try to answer your reservations:
1: The fact that FT fibres have fewer capillaries is immaterial as they are already doing the job- it is the others we want to influence.
2: Increased capillarization generates more heat throughout the muscle, which, as Dr. Cywinski pointed out, allows the fixed nervous system output to spill over to a larger percentage of a muscle’s fibre, ultimately influencing its characteristics.
3: Increased capillarization maintains the increased heat longer. As you know, the fantastic speeds being generated in training by sprinters today can require recovery breaks of up to 35 minutes to insure optimal intensification and International Competitions may keep athletes in the control room for up to 30 minutes before the event.
4: For decades, athletes have been adamant that ATP supplementation boosts performance in power events, but scientists could see no means by which muscles could be supercharged with ATP and, even if they could, it wouldn’t explain any instant power increase. Recently, however, scientists began looking at ATP’s role in stimulating the circulatory system as the means by which performance is enhanced.
5: Low intensity work will not lower testosterone levels unless the demands of effort and volume far exceed the conservative threshold proposed by me ( 75th percentile for no more than 2200 meters/ session)
Of course, enhanced circulation isn’t the only means by which increased heat is generated as athletes improve. Increased muscle density and leanness will increase the metabolic rate, and improved recruitment will generate more heat in a given muscle volume, and, given the small low intensity load, capillary enhancement must be modest, but it does appear to play a role.
Henk, it seems unbelievable that it’s been 8 years since we did that seminar in Holland! I hope you’ll send a few posts along to my website- Charlie Francis.com. Ange says hello, and we now have a son, James, who’s 3 1/2.
All Our Best
Charlie Francis
Toronto, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: Henk Kraaijenhof
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: [Supertraining] Re: Muscle fibre transformation
Responding to Charlie Francis’ remarks:
What puzzles me is that the Fast Twitch fibres have fewer capillaries
around them than the Slow Twitch fibres.
Probably the low-intensity work, (what is the definition of that
anyway) increase performance even in sprinters, but most likely by
balancing out the high sympathetic activation by sprinting, bounding ,
weights and explosive work by increasing the parasympathetic part of the
nervous system, thus preventing overtraining in sprinters or burnout of
the sprinter.
I have no indication that low intensity training which might induce a
higher density of capillaries, will lower the threshold for firing.
Would this mean that middle- and long distance runners or athletes with
more capillaries would have a lowered threshold than explosive athletes.
Also low-intensity training at high volume is known to decrease e.g.
testosterone, which is a pre-requisite for explosive muscular
functioning.
And low-intensity training will probably (dependent on the definition)
shift muscle fibre composition and fuel use from anaerobic to aerobic
energy systems.
Even stronger aerobic training is known to decrease the power of the
lactic anaerobic system e.g. by lowering the LDH enzyme and shifting
isoenzymes from LDH-5 to LDH-1.
In short: I agree with the fact that low-intensity work has to be done,
even for explosive athletes, but my opinion is that the mechanism
through which this might be beneficial is not through capillarisation
or increasing the work capacity of the muscle, but through balancing the
autonomic nervous system back to the parasympathetic side
But like all of us, I might be wrong…
Best regards,
Henk Kraaijenhof
Amstelveen
Holland
>From Charlie Francis ,Angela@CharlieFrancis.com> :
Re: Fibre Type
Is it a shock that the body can adapt to demand? As a sprint coach, I
was counting on it! As for the motor neurons,
they can be made more effective by lowering their electrical resistance
by heating them through increased local
blood supply (capillary density). This is why, perhaps
counter-intuitively, 65% of our running volume was low
intensity. As well as enhancing capillary density, this interspersing
of low intensity training allowed the volume
and frequency of high intensity work to be lowered to level that could
allow for the continual, and, ultimately,
extreme intensification that could bring these changes about.
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto, Canada
“Rickard Andersson” <swe_power@h…> wrote:
<"The aim with the first phase of the training program is to
transform the type 1 fibres (which are endurance profiled) into the
more explosive type 2A fibres. When this phase is completed the
training changes direction with the aim to transform type 2A fibres
into the strongest type of fibres, namely type 2X"I like to know if
this is even possible. Can one type of muscle fibre
transform into another? >
I’m not an expert in this area, as a sprintcoach I find the topic
extremely interesting though. Transformation of fiber types still
seem to be one of the most disputed issues in exercise physiology.
Professor Bengt Saltin and his group at the Copenhagen Muscle
Research Centre has in the last couple of years done some great work
in this area. Their work seem to indicate that fibers are much more
plastic than we perhaps believed in the past (at least on a molecule
level).
It seems like a undisputed fact that most (all?) types of resistance
training are pushing MHCIIX towards IIA and the only stimuli that
really changes the different MHC proteins towards a faster character
is rest.
There are several studies indicating the same thing showed with
ordinary ATPase staining as well.
To change type I to IIX through IIA might seam appealing but I can’t
really see how it can be practically done. Remember to that it is
highly unlikely that the nerve supplying the fiber ever will change
its character. I small alfa-motor neuron is and will stay a low
threshold motor neuron, no matter how you are training.
I don’t know if it essential with a great IIX population in the
muscles of a powerlifter. Even elite weightlifters seems to do well
with mainly IIA.
Suggested reading, start with:
Myosin heavy chain IIX overshoot in human skeletal muscle.
Andersen JL & Aagaard P Muscle Nerve 2000 Jul 23:1095-104
Håkan Andersson
- Don’t forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if you
wish them to be published!
Re Cadence:
Both Ben Johnson and Marlies Gohr exceeded 5 strides per second, in full flight in actual races, many years ago (Ben 5.1, Marlies 5.3). While decreases in contact time are the principal reason, they are not the only one. Limb length, flexibility, and the intersecting points of the maximums of frequency and length, which occur at different points in the race, all combine to create variations in swing time, however slight, even with the same individual. It seems that everyone is trying to adjust observations and reality to suit the study done by Peter Weyand rather than asking Weyand to explain reality. In fact, this argument is trivial compared to the observation that action must be automatic during the ground contact phase and any attempt to alter the action during this phase (driving, pushing, etc) will have a negative effect.
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Cole
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Re: Maximal cadence rate
From: ddavis_21042
<Joe – First off, I think you have a couple typos. 300 times/sec? I think
you mean 300 times/minute (5 x 60s = 300s, right?)Also, later on, you
write: 1second/0.2seconds = 5 reflexes a minute. I think you mean 5
reflexes/second. >
** Oops. I wrote that late at night 
< In any case, I don’t think the logic holds. I know that I
personally can achieve over 6 steps/second going up stadium stairs
and probably more if I simply do the “buzzing” drill on flat ground. The
buzzing drill is simply pitter-pattering you feet as fast as
possible while standing still.
Charlie Francis often makes the point that virtually anyone can cycle
their legs faster than 5 strides per second. It is likely that the
reason a sprinter’s cadence is limited is that they need to be
concerned not just with quick turnover, but also with delivering
force into the ground. That is, they need to stay on the ground long enough
to deliver optimal levels of force for the speed they are running.
The more force they can deliver in a shorter period of time (impulse?)
the faster should be able to go. Comments? >
** I agree to a point, but the buzzing drill is not a pure cyclical movment is it? I could speed up to
10 strides/sec if I were to be on flat ground, (maybe ;-P) if I were to limit the ROM extensively, and
just use foot taps. Maybe I should have said “movments with the application of force”
In elite sprinting, ground contact times lower to the point where they are 0.07-0.12 seconds at maximal
velocities(11.5-12.5m/s).
You are right in saying that sprinting is about developing force quickly. As speed increases, and ground
contact times decreases, exponentially more force is needed to have further increases in speed, and
further decreases in GCT.
I am not arguing this point though. Why is it that most sprinters even at elite level only seem to go
4.5 strides/second, about the same as a top cyclist?
If the only way currently to increase speed is to decrease GCT and increase force production, is it possible
that by increasing the firing rate of the crossed extensor reflex, the turnover can be greater as well?
We have all heard of peter weyands research into flight times, basically saying that no matter what
your maximal velocity, the swing time is approximately the same for everyone. Now, I don’t know if I agree
with this, but what would happen if it were correct? Could my theory be an explanation for what they saw
in this study? (limitations of the study are noted, and have been discussed elsewhere).
Joe Cole
Dunedin New Zealand
Re Maximalist vs Minimalist Sprint Training
As an avowed Minimalist, I will only make a few comments.
1: The warm-up requires a progressive raising of the core temperature, which is incompatable with a large numbers of drills, as they would have to be introduced too early in the warm-up in order to be completed in a reasonable time-frame. (You then have to warm-up before you can warm up.)
2: The facilities to execute large numbers of specific drills are not always available (hurdles, track,etc) In Zurich, the biggest of all GP meets, you have a grass field for the warm-up- that’s all.
3: If you really need rehearsal at this late stage, you’re in a world of trouble already.
----- Original Message -----
From: Keats Snideman
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:06 PM
Subject: [Supertraining] Maximalist vs. Minimalist Sprint Training
In searching the Supertraining archives, I found the articles regarding minimalist vs. maximalist training
very intersting. The posts on low-tech vs. high tech training were also thought-provoking. My question
to the forum is regarding sprint training; drills in particular.
As a sprinter, I have studied and read from so many of the speed experts out there and have tried and
accumulated an entire library of so called “sprint specific” drills. There have been times in my training
where I have done many drills prior to my sprint workouts (maximalist approach) and times where I have
done hardly any at all (minimalist approach). Regardless of whether I did a few or many drills, it doesn’t
really seem to make a difference in my final times during a meet or a timed practice sprint. If anything,
prior to a race, I may feel physically and mentally more prepared because of the lengthy warm-up but it
never reflected on my final time for the race.
What do any of you think are the bare minimum drills for a sprinter and is there really any research
proving that all those fancy drills are any better than just doing repeated sprints at ever increasing
intensities (speed) as a warm-up? Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Keats Snideman
Lakeville, MN
Supercharge your e-mail with a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads
and NoTaglines --> LYCOS MAIL PLUS.
http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
Modify or cancel your subscription here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Don’t forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if you
wish them to be published!
Re Swing time
The claim is that this aspect of sprinting is not trainable. But, since everyone can move their limbs (in the air) faster than any conceivable running frequency, why would you try to train it anyway?
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: JRTELLE@AOL.COM
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 1:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Maximal Cadence Continued
Ken,
Great answer. Ive spent a ton of time developing exercises and resistance to
increase speed but obviously not much in a deep understanding of sprinting.
See below for comments
Ken Jakalski writes:
<< It is true that the vertical ground force increases when the ratio of
foot-ground contact time to the total stride time increases. However, those
who have done extensive work on human locomotion (Farley, Kram, et. al) would
agree that increasing the vertical ground reaction force is not a mechanism
that a runner can use to increase sprint speed. Why? >>
Telle:
so longer GCT always equates to a greater % increase of verticle
force(s)?
<<In terms of the mechanics of human locomotion, what seems consistent in
the research is that decreases in contact time are basically unavoidable with
speed increases. Shorter GCT is apparent in all sprinters at their top speed.
No disagreement here. >>
telle–
I still cant intuit that but the idea of doing “duck walks” down the
track isnt real inspiring either. I have a strong feeling that youre
right–but I still need to have an internal experience of the dynamics to
totally (98%) agree.
<<However, these reductions in impulse result in
reduced aerial time available for sprinters to reposition the swing limb.
When aerial times diminish to the minimums providing sufficient time to
reposition the swing limb (in other words, minimum swing time), the runner
has reached his/her top speed. >>
Telle:
well thats interesting --that suggests training the hip flexers even
harder–standing cable plyos for hip flexion !!! dumbbell plyo hip
flexions on a incline board as shown in “Super training” Does the knee
extension occur rather as an extension(sorry) of the hip flexion ? Like a
whip ?
<< What seems to have generated so much interesting and enjoyable discussion
relative to the barriers to speed is, in part, the conclusion derived from
the Harvard study that the maximum speed at which the limb can be
repositioned doesn’t appear to be a trainable entity. >>
well with your knowledge base I assume you feel as I do, that that is
ridiculous–did Charlie Francis have anything to say about this?
Thanks again for your consideration.
Kindest regards to you,
Jerry
Jerry Telle
Lakewood Colorado
jrtelle@AOL.com
Re Swing Leg
The point I was trying to make is that the return rate is controlled primarily by the ground contact phase, as, given sufficient flexibility, the leg will reposition to a point requiring very little input from the hip flexors at that point. An emphasis on hip flexor exercises may lead to more tightness, which leads to a more open swing phase, which leads to the need for more power for the swing phase, which… you get the idea. Additionally, weighted hip flexor exercises often teach the athlete to swing the leg up and towards the torso instead of up and forward.
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: JRTELLE@AOL.COM
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Supertraining] Maximal Cadence Continued
Charlie Francis writes:
<< The claim is that this aspect of sprinting is not trainable. But, since
everyone can move their limbs (in the air) faster than any conceivable
running frequency, why would you try to train it anyway? >>
Ken Jakalski wrote previously:
<< …reductions in impulse result in
reduced aerial time available for sprinters to reposition the swing limb.
When aerial times diminish to the minimums providing sufficient time to
reposition the swing limb (in other words, minimum swing time), the runner
has reached his/her top speed. >>
In my knowledge-impoverished state there seems to be a discrepancy here. If
coach Francis is reading–under what conditions were the above mentioned
swing leg speeds attained ? I have this picture of an athlete suspended in a
harness with their legs spinning away.
Seems to me that if the swing leg is swinging opposite a drive leg making
ground contact, the physics-physiology of the swing leg is altered
dramatically. That is the vertical downward force through the drive leg/foot
of a swing leg(and arm) driving forward and up imparts a useable force
through the drive foot (hamstrings also to a lesser extent?)–tending to
increase dorsi flexion accel/deceleration, thus contributing to stretch-
shortening elastic energy use and may be stretch reflex also ?? Furthermore
if there is a useable verticle force imparted to the drive leg the
reverberation up from drive leg would effect the swing leg ??
thanks for the sprint theory series–Cant wait until I have the time to read
them.
PB’s to all,
Jerry Telle
Lakewood Colorado USA
jrtelle@AOL.com
Re Mach Drills
Many years ago, Gerard Mach invented a few simple drills to facilitate the learning of sprint mechanics. Unfortunately, he failed to make them fool-proof, as fools are so ingenious. Over the years, everyone under the sun has bastardized these drills, under the guise of “improvement”, until they’ve become a dog’s breakfast, in an attempt to lay claim to the drills as their own. Gerard’s drills were very helpful, but now, sadly, hardly anyone knows how to do them properly, or even where they came from. Gerard must be appalled.
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: CoachJ1@aol.com
To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:00 PM
Subject: [Supertraining] Making sense of cadence
Charlie Francis writes:
> The point I was trying to make is that the return rate is controlled
> primarily by the ground contact
> phase, as, given sufficient flexibility, the leg will reposition to a point
> requiring very little input from
This is a sound analysis from a coach who has known intituitively for years
what current research (regardless of how we interpret it) really seems to be
confirming. As Claire Farley said in a recent note regarding the
practicality of doing drills to increase the speed of the free swinging limb
back to the track–or what is often referred to as “negative vertical
velocity”:
"I’m not sure that I understand what you mean by this [negative vertical
velocity]. My best interpretation is that you are referring to the stance
limb, and that many coaches believe that if people can make the stance foot
move backward faster relative to the trunk, then the ground reaction force
will increase. It is true that the vertical ground force increases when the
ratio of foot-ground contact time to the total stride time increases.
However, I don’t think that increasing the vertical ground reaction force is
a mechanism that a runner can use to increase sprint speed. [By this she
means that contact time decreases with speed]
According to the spring-mass model, if a runner can increase leg stiffness,
the runner will be able to run faster. If the leg is stiffer, the foot-ground
contact time is shorter, and the person can run faster. This does lead to a
greater vertical ground reaction force but it is a by-product of having a
stiffer leg."
Focus on hip flexor training via specialty machines or weighted thigh cuffs
has increased over the past several years, and is often considered essential
to improving top end speed, because the athlete benefit from strengthening
what Dr. Michalow refers to as the forward propulsive muscles.
This concept of swing mechanics improving ground forces was introduced to me
back in the early eighties, along with several specialty drills for speed to
enhance these mechanics. Since then, many of my prep colleagues have used
the Mach series (or A-B-C’s) as drills to mimic/enhance correct leg swing,
and Charlie, please correct me if I’m wrong here, I don’t think Gerard
intended these drills as a way to model swing mechanics in isolation
There is still much confusion here. In fact, we had a discussion on Supertraining a
while back as to whether Mach should be given “credit” for these drills in
the first place. I’m sure you can clarify this for us. Like Brent
McFarlane and several others, I 've always referred to these as the Mach
drills. Of course, everyone has a variation of this marching, skipping,
sprinting series, and maybe that’s why it’s hard to attribute these A-B-C’s
to a particular individual. However, from your perspective, is this another
example of a good thing coming via a Canadian coach who hasn’t received the
proper credit, or is there a different origin to these widely used but often
misapplied drills?
Kindest regards,
Ken Jakalski
Lisle High School
Lisle, Illinois
Dear Andy:
Usually it’s the other way around! (Will success in Track and Field have
favourable repercussions on their sex life?)
Seriously, though, the East Germans looked into this carefully and concluded
that sex was generally beneficial. (At the World Cup in Rome in 1981, they
took the whole team to the porno movies before the event and encouraged
“team pairings”. I remember joking with their top male distance runner: "Who
gets Slupianick (Women’s WR holder in the Shot)? He replied: “Me- if I
lose!”
Best Wishes
Charlie Francis
Toronto, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: “Andy Eggerth” <aeggerth@hotmail.com>
To: <supertraining@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 4:00 PM
Subject: [Supertraining] Effects of Sexual Intercourse on hormone levels
> I’m curious. I had an athlete ask me what the reprocussions of sex are on
> track and field training/competition. I have had coaches in the past tell
> me that one should not have sex so that the testosterone levels will
remain
> high, but I suspect that many were speaking from a moral standpoint (about
> fornication), making up a ‘scientific reason’. Obviously, there are
> psychological issues, but I’m interested in the biochemistry. Does anyone
> know of any studies that have looked at the fluctuations of sex hormones
> after intercourse, compared to a duration without having sex?
>
> Andy Eggerth
> Minneapolis, USA
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~–>
> Sell a Home for Top $
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/jd3IAA/WpSolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> Modify or cancel your subscription here:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
