Ed Coan's

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

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 :confused:

The “overdose” syndrome that plagues the corporate population of American coaches (technical tactical as well as physical preparatory) exists because it is a pedestrian solution to a complex problem.

Dropping a stick of dynamite in the water will bring a certain amount of fish to the surface; but at what cost to the surrounding ecosystem and what type of fish and other underwater life will be destroyed in the process… Meanwhile, the patient fisherman equipped with the necessary bait and tackle has a much higher probability of extracting the intended target at zero cost to the surrounding ecosystem and minimal cost to other underwater life.

No doubt, we live in a quick fix, short sighted society; however, this is no justification for “overdose”. To date, my coaching and personal training career has spanned a broad spectrum of subjects (youth, high school, collegiate, amateur, professional, and foreign and domestic military special operations) and I have never resorted to “overdosing” a client yet results have always been timely and positive.

Ironically, the populations most often subject to the naive coaching mistakes we are discussing are the same populations who are experiencing the most accelerated rate of biological maturation. These uninformed coaches must be reminded that it takes very little intensification to foster results during this period and the greater the intensification the more the interference with this sensitive stage of growth.

Analogous to Charlie describing the utility of sprinters learning to ‘wait for it/let it happen’ coaches must understand the same philosophy applies to the physical preparation of developing athletes.

I didn’t list any disclaimers because of the benchmarks/standards that must be achieved before moving on to the next level. The above program is for ages 16> - only after meeting the standards of the previous age brackets. If all goes well the athlete will start to learn ol/barbell lifts at 12-13 years old; after successfully meeting the benchmarks from the previous cycles - Mb/BW/General strength circuits etc.

Man seriously, where were you when I was a developing athlete!?

How true, bottle this and sell it to sports coaches and half the corporate business executives I have ever worked for !!

Where are you from? Eastern Europe?

Unfortunately, my experience suggests that I could bottle it but regardless if it was taken willingly or force fed, most recipients wouldn’t have the aptitude to make much use out of it.

Therein lies the rub. It isn’t enough to have access to quality resources, even if they are studied extensively, if there isn’t enough aptitude to begin with.

Another Charlie analogy (regarding excessive jump training for basketball players of low preparation) "It doesn’t matter how many times you jump, regardless of how high you can’t jump)

Reminds me, a lady came in last week to do some Work experience in my training studio. She was top of her class, studied the stuffing out of her books. Went home every night and did 4-5hrs of youtube, internet seaching ect ect. So, practical demo - i asked her for 1 Push, 1 Pull 1 shoulder and 1 arm exercise. I got, 3 x Pull, 1 x weird arm and 1 x fail leg.
So, FAIL number 1.
Fail number 2 was - i demonstrated 8 * different Row exercises, using cables, dumbbells, mediballs, bars, bodyweight. She thought ONE was a chest exercises and all the rest were Bicep exercises with shoulders…
She has just come out of college and is now fully accredited.
Age, approx 50.

If a top of the class student FAILS on such basic lifts - what hope do they have understanding anything else more complicated?

Hah, sadly no. Canada, prairie province. Some would argue that’s far worse.

I asked becauseJanic looks Eastern European to me and I would have found it ironic had you been from that part of the globe and had insufficient physical education during the school age years.