Wermouth, seems as if you are missing the fact that I am emphasizing the important of rhythm as much as you are.
So again, I’ll ask you to understand that if competition structure is the framework from which you are working backwards from then competition dynamics are the reference from which you must work towards.
I am not refuting what coaches like Andreas Behm, Vince Anderson, or any other coach of elite hurdlers has done. I am, however, pointing out facts that are more immutable then what you are criticizing, however.
For example, reducing spacing by 1-2 feet reduces the take-off point for obvious reasons, and by a greater quantity, then a reduction in hurdle height, of say 3-6cm, at competition spacing. The matter of key significance regarding the mathematics of our discussion is, in fact, the quantities (displacement either along the X or Y axis) involved.
Again I will reiterate that I too am emphasizing rhythm/timing as the basis for my argument in each of these last posts. The difference is that my argument is based off of finding a different derivative of competition rhythm/timing by way of more minute, by comparison, displacements.
I’d point your attention to the reason stride length is initially reduced in a S-L or L-S is because in both cases the start of the seasonal training begins with runs slower in velocity (either the sub-max accels, split 60’s with intensity limits, or special endurance I or II runs). Then, as the intensity limits extend or the special endurance becomes shorter, the velocity naturally increases along with the stride length.
by association, an alternate approach to conventional hurdle preparation is to preserve competition spacing yet reduce the height by a margin commensurate with what each hurdler requires to reduce the designated velocity/stride length (they can reduce their velocity because they don’t need to sprint as fast to generate the take-off velocity required to clear the higher hurdle) as well as lessening the total number of hurdles (s-l in this case).
All the while, any number of “power speed” drills that make use of hurdles remain key fixtures for the same reasons they always have.
James,
I apologise for not explaining earlier the concept that I am trying to implement, which I think would make things easier for you to understand.
We are running at those spacing for number of reasons, not only work on mechanical side but also on frequency of the strides.
So the concept is to bring the spacing to the athlete (not the athlete to the spacing) when they are ready, progressively and safely.
The distance will gradually get longer in between hurdles, over the next week will change as much as 1.5m in between. Later might change by another meter, as the intensification will be going up so the distance in between, later might change by couple of feet then foot and so on. While form and rhythm will virtually stay the same.
I think that you also forgot to recognise that at some point in hurdles development frequency must be improved, because of the nature of the event. You just cannot have the same approach to stride length as you applying forces as you have mentioned in flat sprint.
Sorry mate but there is more into the hurdles than X or Y involved. If that was as simple as you are presenting in your post, than I do present my counter argument by asking simple question why there are not that many 13.0 hurdlers?
There are too many variables involved in hurdle clearance and running patterns than X and Y.
Also, why would I need to change the spacing so drastically, sacrificing quite possibly form, mechanics and frequency. When by progressive approach I can retain two and work on another one?
Race is not happening tomorrow, and you must understand that keeping eyes on future stages of development must take a priority. As I said before we will be eventually running on spacing which is closer to the competition one but not next week and not this month.
Also I would strongly encourage you to reach for Andreas Behm notes from Summit it will change your perspective on hurdles eg “Even with senior athletes, we NEVER work at race spacing in practice.”
Now imagine what implications that might have on developing hurdlers.
Understood Wermouth, I am enjoying our discussion.
My suggestion was not stated as a one to be encouraged to happen immediately; rather to offer an alternative perspective for the future.
As to the X and Y displacements, of course I was not characterizing all dynamics of the hurdle event to a two dimensional coordinate system. I was simply reducing the main talking points of our discussion to the X and Y system in order to contextualize the significance of displacement magnitude in terms of the mathematics.
As to the frequency point, again I will revert to the competition dynamics in which the frequency of both ground contacts between hurdles, and the frequency of encountering each hurdle, are dependent upon factors related to the hurdler’s anthropometry, output, technique…That said, as I stated previously, I believe strongly in how drills performed with hurdles are a superb platform for supportive development analogous to the pure sprinter’s power speed drills.
As to the question regarding why there aren’t more hurdler’s achieving sub 13sec times, I would present one conjecture, as controversial as it may be, in the form of: because the preparation of hurdlers is relatively the same (point in fact the nature of the discussion that we are having in which I am presenting a far less popular argument relative to what the more grand proportion of hurdle coaches suggest).
Further, of course, we must factor in what percentage of the population is training for the 110H, the genetic human performance ceilings and how close the achieved times are to what the most prevailing scientific theories suggest as being possible (similar to what has been forecasted in many other T&F disciplines).
Consider Nehemiah’s 12.93 in 1981 up to Merritt’s 12.80 in 2012: 31 years to improve .13
By Association, Jim Hines went 9.95 (FAT) in 1968 and fast forward to Bolt’s 9.58 in 2009: 41 years to improve .37
At the 31 year point, 1999, the fastest 100m time was Maurice Greene’s 9.79 (which was the first time anyone rivaled what Ben Johnson did 11 years earlier in Seoul). So that’s .16 in 31 years relative to when Hines ran 9.95.
So relative to the 31 year comparison between the first 13sec barrier breaker in the 110H and the first 10sec barrier breaker in the 100m, we are looking at a differential of .03
Granted, Bolt’s 100m WR has bested Greene’s 9.79 by .21; however, I’m not sure we’ll see 9.58 go down for quite a long time.
All said, history has certainly seemed to support that the men’s 110H event may very well be challenging the human performance limit regarding the 13sec barrier; however, we can never cast aside the importance of interest in the event (how many men are training for it around the world) and, as I stated, to what extent the methodologies used in coaching practice have objectively exhausted more than the most conventional approaches.
As an aside, I am an acquaintance of the former World and Olympic 110H champion Roger Kingdom and we have had some excellent discussions on the topic. He essentially coached himself through hard work, so that is a true testament to how gifted he was. He told me that he felt he was well on his way to going sub 12.9; however, he has many a sleepless night due to the fact that he sustained a serious injury in late 1990 or early 1991 playing basketball that ultimately lead to the end of his competitive career (even though he got himself back into reasonable competitive shape afterward).
Friday session was reasonable,
Medball throws with acceleration 6x15m I think that this exercise is brilliant definitely helping to athletes who have tendencies to collapse on the first couple of steps.
Moved to first flat runs on the grass 3x3xEF (20/20)
First rep was rubbish had to stop the whole group. I think that they got confused with Wednesday (tempo)
The other reps were very good especially Athlete X, on other hand Athlete Y wasn’t stepping over the support leg properly so I was bit concern, the next day I thought about it and actually it struck me that Athlete Y was doing on the flat reps exactly what I have been asking him to do in between hurdles.
The runs were very fast after first rep of set three I have abandoned the other two reps, they were running really well.
Moved to gym
Cleans, squat, couple of upper body almost exactly as on Monday.
Are you going directly from the med ball accels to the EF? If so, you might consider a few warm up accelerations from the same starting position you are having them perform for the EF reps. This would ensure that the first rep of the EF work is spot on.
Yes I did, straight to speed change drill.
Thanks for the advice.
Monday session we had to be indoors weather was just awful.
Acceleration 10m after medball chest throw 2x5
Dribble bleeds 3x3x30m
Haven’t change much in the gym guys loading weights by themselves (load need to be approved by me for the squat and clean)
Wednesday
Athletes X did 6x15m falling starts
Extensive tempo of 250m, 200m, 200m, 250m.
The first two Athlete X was holding back a bit, but on the last two stepped up a bit and got to much better body form.
I guess still judging the distance and at the same feel for the execution.
Not too bad, I know that in two weeks will be better.
Circuit at the beginning, between reps and at the end, Pedestal, Kilimanjaro, Everest, Waterloo, Baatan and Rudiment at the end.
Throws/abs 300/300.
Athlete Y
2x4x10h @84 height, 6.5m apart. Looking very stable, good touch down times and what most important form.
4x12 hurdles, 15 inch hight, 3m apart, 3 steps in between, fast rhythmical execution. The focus is on touching ground well in between, reducing digging into the track and perform more of ankle/calf dribble in between (rhythmically of course)
Finished with 3x10 hurdles, @84cm, 3m apart for trial leg and 4x10 over the top one step in between.
Over the top looked really good, fast and relaxed.
I gave Athlete Y bit of hard time at the beginning of the GPP and during last season for neglecting mobility and flexibility. Actually last Monday Athlete Y did show off a bit about the improvements that he achieved over the past six weeks. Have to say that they are very good. Which was evident during hurdle session.
I think that I have stayed before that one step in between is a very demanding drill and if the mobility/ flexibility and strength levels are not in place athletes will struggle.
Last season we did it and the improvements were reasonable re: drill improvements, this season Athlete Y is already head and shoulders above the level that he was during last season.
Finished with circuits 100/300.
Re: Roger Kingdom, he’s a monster. The power, strength levels, speed. He’s wasn’t running over the hurdles he was running literally through them lol.
Did first tests this week,
Speed-wise athlete Y is where we’ve left off last season, Athlete X is quite far from initial target. Strength-wise both youngsters have shown so far desirable improvements.
To be honest athlete Y just drive me crazy, late for the sessions and than rushing through the warm up, not cool.
This week we have trained two days only, I have decided to give the group rest of the week off.
Pretty good first SPP I session today.
Athlete X did
3x20m falling start,
3x20m falling start with sled.
3x3x30m 3point accelerations first rep of each set with sled.
I feel like there can be more aggressive hammering/ arm and leg action with more power to the ground.
Form was quite good.
Bounding 5x6 for distance. The lack of ability to apply force to the ground is evident. This particular quality must be improved.
Athlete Y did
3x20m falling start,
6x tape runs (from start line marker is at 0.60m, the rest from each and other as follows: 1.15m, 1.35m, 1.50m, 1.65m, 1.75m, 1.85m, 1.75m)
Tape runs going to be present for the next 6/7 weeks.
5x2h, 4x3h @ 91cm height, 2.5 foot in.
Times from start to 1H touch down (TD) were good 2.56-2.61
TD H1 to H2 0.97-1.02sec.
TD H2 to H3 0.96-0.97 sec.
Bit too much at the back.
For the first hurdles session (starts) I am happy.
Both athletes did weights after.
Clean 4x3
Squat 3x5
Hip thrusts 2x10
2 upper body exercises of athletes choice 2x10
Curl, Nordic, Hypertension 2x10
Abs 300/400
Interesting for you to integrate the sled into the SPP. How long are you intending to keep the sled involved in the SPP?
I ask because, as we know, the sled increases GCT which (while fantastically appropriate for early season preparation/GPP) is not the specific stimuli one would expect more of in the SPP. You mention lack of arm/leg action and ability to apply force in the ground. Keep in mind this could be a reflection of the continued sled work, and particularly because he performed the bounds after the sled sprints.
The cyclic rate of the arm/leg action is obviously related to the velocity and the resistance of the sled inhibits this.
It’s possible that he may have showed you what you were looking for without the sled, and again by performing bounds after unresisted sprints.
I am planning to use sled for another two weeks.
Btw there is no extra load on the sled, sled itself weights 6.8kg (15lb).
I was also considering of using sled in the second meso after SE runs as a strength tool, but that will remain to be seen. Need to go through the current cycle first.
We had a solid session on Wednesday.
Athlete X did 4x20m
And 3x3x80m.
Blasted the first rep of 80s consequently we had to extend the recovery time between sets.
Rudiment 1x 20m
Athlete Y did
4x tape accelerations
2x30m
5x2h+ 5x8H (was planned 6), @91cm height, 4 feet in.
Have to work on coming off the hurdle sooner, touch down were about 1.3m away from the first hurdle, it’s way too far.
3x10h @91cm, 8 feet apart, trial leg and middle.
After track session both athletes did general strength.
4 upper-body exercises in fitness suite 3x10
Abs 350.
Stretching.
In general I feel that session could have been better, having said that taking into account that we are in our first week of SPP, it wasn’t too bad.
Friday session.
Both athletes did same workout.
3/4x 20m falling acceleration.
3x 10m blocks,
3x30m blocks,
2x3x40 (EF) Athlete Y did 4 looked bit tight, athletes X did 5.
Hurdle hops 6x6h
Strength like on Monday.
What factor(s) are you attributing this to? Take-off point, pelvic position in flight, lack of volitional effort to snap the leg down, delayed downward cycling of the contralateral arm…
Athlete X did
3x20m falling start,
3x20m 3point starts
3x3x30m 3point accelerations first rep of each set with sled just like last week.
Bounding for distance 5x6.
By removing earlier runs with sled, Athlete X was able to move much better in the further parts of the traing.
Athlete Y did:
4x 20m tape accelerations.
4x2h felt discomfort in hamstrings of the lead leg (as he described 5 out of 10) and we have abandoned the rest of the workout.
Pretty good session today
Athlete X did
5 falling starts
1x10m sled followed by 4x30m blocks
There is a bit of a pause on the first step.
We did rolling starts 4x30m which looks better than blocks I guess there is not enough power produced by Athlete X.
Then we moved to 3x40 EF.
Athlete Y did recovery workout (hamstrings rehab) there wasn’t any discomfort while doing runs also no discomfort while doing ballistic stretching.
I didn’t want to risk therefore there was no fast running, however we were able do fast hyper hurdles 8x8h 15inch height @3m apart also no discomfort was present during exercises.
Wednesday session.
Athlete X
6x20m moving quite good.
2x3x80m quite smooth.
One the last rep did project hips high enough at least in my opinion.
Straight leg drill 4x40m
Upper body for exercises 3x10
200 medball throws.
300 abs.
Stretching.
Athlete Y also had a good session.
Tempo runs 2 x 10m, 4 x 10m, 6 x 20m etc…
Hyper hurdles like on Monday but this time ten of them x5
10h 3m apart @84 hight one step in between tial x4, middle x6.
Upper body for exercises 2x10
200 medball throws.
300 abs.
Stretching mainly hip flexor.
All seems to be pretty good no problem or discomfort during any of the above exercises.
Today (Friday)
Athlete Y
3x20m falling starts.
2x10m blocks
4x30 blocks
Good first starts, as soon as I got couple guys together for two starts it tends to tens up and messed up first two strides by over reaching.
But than last start was pretty good. So we moved to:
3xEF (20, 20)
2xFEF (20, 10, 20)
Good form, maybe arm action little bit too high.
Athlete Y pretty good warm up, looks good during dynamic and ballistic stretching, drills and strides.
First 10m start. Bollocks!
Athlete described discomfort as long thin line goes along his hamstrings. Don’t know WTF is going on.
Physio next week.
Did a couple of tests. Any form of hamstrings load during concentric phase shows certain level of discomfort, for example straight led hip extension but no issue while performing eccentric contraction whether is a controlled hip flexion from extended hip position with load or loaded knee extension.
Rehab continues.
We’ve been following the hamstrings rehab protocols.
However after last assessment that I have done muscles have gone hypertonic, I guess to protect the injured area.
We have arranged massage, also physio.
Yesterday we did easy bike 12min.
Bit of massage around area and EMS to loose the hypotonic muscles.
Athlete performed 4x2x10m drills- A’s, gym upper body exercises.
Finished session with one extra EMS session.