Is it normal to see an initial increase in sprint times following the use of hills in training? Here are the specifics. I had a training session yesterday (5/10/11) of 3 150s and 3 200s of which I only completed 2 150s and 2 200s. The hills were performed this past Friday on (5/6/11). My last set of three of 150s was run in 17.4s, 17.1 s, and 18.0 s respectively and was run on either 5/3/11 or 5/4/11 (not sure which date). The times for the 150s today were 20.2 s and 20.3 s. This is a serious change from the times of last week and I cannot account for it besides the hill work will was anywhere from 20-30m @ 25 repetitions. I believe the hill grade was somewhere between 2-6%. Any hint or suggestions would be much appreciated.
No responses…Hath anybody a possible answer?.. lol
how did you feel the day of the slower 150s? what was the gap between hills and the next 150 session? who was timimg the 150? what was the weather? where yu allowing time for recovery after the sessions?
I don’t get the connection between the hills and the 150s. I guess, you were just tired from the last such session; or a different person was timing you, as Xman suggested, or simply you didn’t start from the same point perhaps?
If you are prone to overly extend the lower leg when sprinting, or you tend to swing the lower leg through before the thigh reaches parallel, then you would not run optimal performance in the sprints. One of the reasons I like low angle Hills is that it tends to oblige sprinters to left their knees and refrain from poking the lower leg out. Do that and you usually get a severe jarring up your spine. So, if your hills session forced you to clean up your sprint mechanics, you just might have carried that across to the track - hence your improvement on the clock (and, hopefully in form).
I thought the times were slower After the hills, no? Oh, I am confused!
“Is it normal to see an initial increase in sprint times following the use of hills in training?”
OK Niko you are correct! The writer is complaining he is now running slower. I misinterpreted his commentary completely.
In this case, it was probably the hills which weakened this sprinter, but in the long run I would think there are gains to be made in the sense of “reduced” times.
That’s why I said I don’t get the connection between the two, at least with immediate effect. What I meant to say, I guess, is that probably the reason for the slower times was other than the hills? And I mentioned a possibly wrong starting point not to ‘offend’ anyone, of course, but because depending on the track and its marks, it simply happens sometimes. Regardless, I liked your reasoning though, KitKat!
I ran the 150s on the same track i always do and the same person has timed all of my sessions for this year. What threw me off was that there was adequate rest between the day i ran the hill and the day i sprinted (4 days if i recall correctly). This is the major reason I was so surprised to see a 3 sec change in my times over these training sessions. As for how i felt…i must say i was definitely not feeling the same explosion i normally do coming out of my 3 pt stance.
were hills part of your total training plan? if not why did yu do them. sometimes when you throw in a different session it has a crazy effect just like selecting a new exercise in the weights room with DOMS. when you say you didnt feel the same then i personally feel your werent fully recovered. were you sore beforehand or heavy?
Don’t look at it isolation. It is one hill session. Tiredness is more than just tiredness from training. Also the weather plays a part.
For every question there could possibly be 10 answers.