“Why fight for tenths of a second in the start when there are seconds to be gained in the latter part of the race”
The difference between a world class and lower level sprinter:
____________ 0-30m___100m___200m
world class_____ 3.7_____9.6_____19.2
beginner_______4.1_____11.5____ 23.4
___________ +0.4____ +1.9____+4.2
i’ve read that quote too, but thats why i get confused as to how weight lifting kind of more specifically falls under improving the tenths at the start, whereas special endurance is those seconds at the end, but beginners are suppose to try and develop a lot of strength and conditioning before specific running?? it seems kind of contradictory to me, i must be misinterpreting something
what type of times bring on into the “intermediate” spectrum (where things should get more specific)?
‘Strength’ does not have to developed via weightlifting or traditional strength training; Explosive MB Throws, Reactive/Elastic Jumps, and Alactic Sprints are more appropriate for a beginner.
Tempo, calisthenics, abdominal work, and low amplitude medicine ball work develop fitness in a beginner; this is where the seconds at the end of races are shaved off.
Once an appropriate level of fitness is in place (and this is not a algorithm, but rather an organic process that lies in the ability of the coach to observe and make appropriate decisions) then emphasis on speed and special endurance can be done (but the ratio never exceeds 50:50 of alatic:lactic work).
Thank you. Very good reply. In my discussions with many strength coaches, there is an inherent assumption that strength must be developed in the weight room. This bias occurs because most strength coaches have a higher degree of comfort in the weight room. Training and development is organic, not mechanical and linear. As a coach, observe, make assessments, make adjustments and then observe again. We have lots of tools at our disposal to apply.
ok, cool, i can wrap my mind around that. i also remember reading or hearing in one of cf’s lectures something about as far as hypertrophy work goes a sprinter looks to get a proper somatotype or build. once body fat is low enough that would be developed probably in the weight room, right? i dont know many people who have packed on muscle with medball throws. and i assume that this “bodybuilding” stage for a beginner would be preceeded by the strength work qb pointed out
but also, just personally, i know rb says just weights are enough to have him run fast, but is it good enough for your se? because i know everyone is different, but when i was really pushing the weights and had very good general fitness i still had very limited se and top speed was actually worse than before strength and fitness training. my times were that of a beginner, but fitness and weight room more of an intermediate or maybe an advanced in certain things so i assume i needed more top speed or se work. i just dont know how only pushing weights and plyos can develop anyone to be a much better 100m runner past the first 20 or 30m
My understanding is that the big question is converting and applying all that new found strength and power into a sprint specific output. Like you may the capacity to apply large amounts of force but until you’ve conditioned and trained your body to use it, it won’t do you any good and is literally just added weight to move.
yeah, i guess thats hitting the nail on the head for me. maybe its more a beginner is defined less by a time run and more by what stage of the training they are in (have they developed proper strength and conditioning yet, or on the other end, when is specific work tolling enough that it can’t be thrown at an athlete full blast all the time)
Don’t think ‘in the weight room’; you can develop cross section via calisthenics (ergo push-ups, sit-ups, dips, etc.), reactive/elastic and explosive jumps, and sprints also develop cross section, whether or not you need traditional strength training means in order to develop cross-section is preparedness and individual attribute dependent. (most sprinters do not require as much cross-section as team sports and other speed/power sports [ergo shot-put, discuss, weightlifting, etc.] so in theory, you could probably develop the requisite somatotype via very rudimentary means and proper nutrition; again, its going to be individual dependent)
No, weights are not good enough for Speed or Special Endurance; specific runs in the parameters outlined by Charlie must be done in order to optimally develop these qualities.
though conditioning along with strengthening is what beginners are suppose to do (general) and if this includes shaving seconds off late in the race really its just reaching a certain minimal acceptable amount of each then moving to se in order to cut even more time at the end?
but wouldn’t these mostly develop masses of slow twitch muscle? and if done explosively, probably not very much hypertrophy will occur, right?
You are pretty much right; at first you will develop basic general fitness qualities (such as strength, speed, endurance, mobility, suppleness, etc.) via explosive med ball throws, alactic sprints, reactive/elastic jumps, tempo runs, abdominal work, calisthenics, etc. But it shouldn’t be the ‘minimal’; herein lies the expertise of the coach to decide when each individual athlete has reached the objective of each training means; again it isn’t going to be ‘minimal’, it is going to be the amount that is needed in order to produce optimal results in the specific sport discipline; furthermore to make something minimal, you would have to have a maximum and their is no explicit amount of any training mean that governs how much an athlete should or should not do; training is an organic process, it isn’t mechanistic, EVERY athlete adapts to stimuli differently, the coach much have a keen eye to decide when enough is enough, which is why Charlie was so successful.
As the the years go by and the athlete moves further to the right on the specialization continuum, the more specific the means become, and their is always an organic/feedback process of programming going on designed to fit the athletes strengths while developing AND perfecting all of the requisite qualities needed to excel in sprinting; ergo the start, acceleration, top speed, and speed endurance (and special endurance in the 200m on).
Order Key Concepts and CFTS and you will understand this straight from the horse’s mouth.
You don’t need to look at in which fiber type will be developed. The objective is to develop an appropriate somatotype for sprinting (and again this will be individual, think Ben Johnson vs. Carl Lewis and Asafa Powell vs. Usain Bolt, one shorter and more muscular, then other taller and lankier) so let the means fall into place by monitoring the progress of your overarching objective.
‘Explosive’ training (ergo the sprints, jumps, and throws) will facilitate myofibular hypertrophy (vs. sacroplasmic hypertrophy, which is the non-contractile constituents of the muscle), which will increase the cross-section of the contractile components of the sarcomere (actin and myosin); again you need not get wrapped up in that thought process.
Think objectively (again the big objective is to excel in sprinting); I need to achieve cross-section in my upper torso -> I am 14 years old -> select age appropriate means (body-weight calisthenics) -> monitor the progress of this objective -> objective has been achieved -> decide on new objective and restart process.
Final thought, don’t look at training in separate parts, view it as an entire system of inter-related parts that function as a whole and have varying degrees of affect that cause certain effects on the organism.
thank you for the reply, i have cfts so i will go through that.
Your thoughts and vernacular seem to echo many of my own with a degree of precision. How bout some credit (wink wink)
As for the “minimum”, there is in fact a very manageable means of monitoring this value just as there is in the medical community.
Your statement regarding the need to know the maximum, in order to prescribe a minimum, is incorrect because every subject has his/her own tolerances. For this reason, every subject has different optimal dose requirements and, on the other end of the spectrum, tolerances for excess.
No different than in the clinical environment, a degree of trial and error must be practiced and it is unarguably in the interest of athletes and patients alike for their coaches/doctors to seek the minimum dose necessary to solve the problem.
In the case of the novice athlete, it just so happens that a large dose, of lower concentration (ergo intensity), is required to set the foundational atmosphere for that athlete generating a high apex of sport results later in life (when it counts)
conversely, athletes of very high preparation require carefully managed large doses of high concentration in order to further the already very high percentage of their performance limits at which they are already operating.
The large doses of high concentration that are far too often administered to novice athletes is a grave mistake because the earlier the intensification the shorter the apex and long term development is hindered. While a degree of overdose clearly advances the development of athletes in the low and middle zones of development this must not be viewed in synonym with what is optimal.
As for the management of the types of training stress that is most optimal for the sprinter of low to middle qualification, the nature of the intensity of the various components must be individually measured due to factors already eluded to (morpho-biomechanics, CNS stress tolerance, and etcetera). The only constant is that speed work of some type must be maintained throughout in order that advancements in morphology and strength/power potential occur harmoniously with running mechanics.
Let’s make this simple tb2010:
Key Points of Development:
1: strength to weight ratio aka horse power
2: Plyos aka stiffness
3: mobility
4: movement efficiency
5: work capacity
6: regeneration
I’m in the process of writing a series of articles “ Speed Training For The Ages 7-18”…
Putting the above concepts into action:
Weekly Template: Ages 16> – 4-6 times a weeks, 1.5-2.5 hours per session
Focus: Strength and Explosive Strength Block
Monday:
Warm-up AA - (Mobility Jog, Static stretch, Dynamic flexibility, Sprint Drills, Buildups) (15-20mins)
Speed Work (20-25mins) – see below – 0-10yards
Hills: 10x10+Flat:10x10
Jumps (15-20mins) – see below
SLJ x8 uphill+x8flat
Double Box Jumps 3x5
Explosive Med Ball Throws (10-15mins)-see below
Overhead back 2x5
Between legs forward 2x5
Olympic Lifts & Strength Training (50-70mins) – see below
Olympic Lift (Snatch or Clean) 5x3 (Open %)
Back squats 3x7 (Open %)
Bench press 3x7 (Open %)
High bench rows 3x6-10
Hyper’s 3x8-10
Stiffness Jumps 2x10
Cooldown: A series - Regeneration
Always make sure to issue a disclaimer, particularly regarding the intensive variables (especially Olympic lift variants) that mechanics comes first and if the athlete hasn’t had proper instruction then it isn’t worth doing them. Come to think of it, when you’re done with it you should forward it to all the S&C coaches in the US because the youtube videos indicate that most of them don’t know how to instruct most speed/power/strength drills nor how to recognize mechanical risk factors/performance inhibitors.
Yeah; I’d say you’ve had a substantial influence on how I view sport training.
All I was trying to get across was what you alluded too; that you must do a degree of trial and error through an organic process and there is no clear cut and dry or explicit amount of training (in terms of low or high amounts) that is needed to obtain results; only that beginners need more breadth and elite need more height.
The context that tb2010 used ‘minimum’ suggested that all individuals need only develop a minimal amount of work capacity, whereas in contrast a wide base must be laid at the beginning of PASM in order to reach the pinnacle (as you alluded too).
What I meant by ‘maximum’ was that their is not a predetermined amount of volume (albeit in any unit used across all means) for all individuals to be achieved (in order to achieve the highest results) because everybody has a finite amount of adaptation energy and some are genetically programmed to have more or less and this is what ultimately defines what amount of load the individual organism can adapt too.
If a maximum was determined, then a minimum in reference to this maximum could also be determined (in order to lay the base for further intensification of the training load), which would mean that training was much more mechanistic and algorithmic.
I suppose this could be done by collecting data on a large amount of individuals across their entire career and seeing what amount of training was done throughout each period of the training process thus allowing one to make predictive models and a range for the total load of training of the years.
Well said. I agree
I’d be interested in reading these articles from you as well.
thank you for the simplification, haha. i’ll be interested in reading those articles too
thanks for more clarification. i think this “grave mistake” happens all the time in high school kids because the training time is pretty much all in season and coaches want results immediately
longterm development should really always be the goal, but is tough to keep the priority when so many younger people are subject to needing to run certain times by a certain year so you dont want to get left behind or might not have enough time 