Hows this for a 200m Workout

[Dazed]

@numba56

You may want to turn down this answer, but really I believe you have to attack workouts with intensity to develop the quality. You need to run fast for your body to need to adapt in a manner that it will run faster. And then to run under 75%, because that is that middle area, really too intense on a muscle and nervous system. I think you cant have a medium intensity, either high or low, fast or slow, run fast or work on technique. Thats just my opinion.

That’s not explaining it at all. I’ve heard this view many times on here, but it does not explain WHY.

[Dazed]

@Johnny

… because this is CharleFrancis.com, and because the man’s philosophy justifiably permeates through the forum, and furthermore has proven to be exceptional both intuitively and in real-world results for me, I can’t imagine defying his experience in this area.

I’m glad to hear it’s worked for you, however your attitude sounds like it would be more at home in a church than it does on a discussion forum. Recognising that there are other methodologies that work very well out there, and that some might be more appropriate for individuals is in no way defying Charlie in any way, nor does it make his views and experience any less legitimate. Quite frankly if I were him, I’d find my training philosophies being transformed into dogma, far more offensive …

@Johnny

To give you an idea what I mean by his philosophy intuitively making sense with me, consider this: I am an ex-volleyball player. Years and years of jumping develop your vertical leap to a great degree, obviously. Now, I see many parallels in the athlete who can jump high with the athlete who can run fast. Like in the areas of quick twitch muscle development, glute and ham involvement in a maximal approach, power at take-off, elastic and reactive properties contributing to explosiveness, etc.

Now, there is no such thing as learning to jump high by taking 80% intensity spike approaches! Not even in conditioning sessions, or at any point in the training year. The jumper instinctively knows he will never jump higher wtihout maximal or near-maximal effort consistently throughout training. That, and my own sprinting results, are why I feel Charlie is bang-on with this concept, though I cannot discount any other person’s success with a different philosophy.

You’d be surprised as to what is done around the world volley ball wise to develop a high vertical. I have friends who play at Olympic and in European legues who do alot of sub maximal plyometrics to develop jump height.

As it relates to athletics, take a look at the John Smith and Clyde Hart training threads, and you will realise that speed all year round is not a necessity - and is sometimes left only to the end of the training programme. This is because all of the properties you have mentioned can be developed through sub maximal means.

[Dazed]

@Alex

Dazed:

Besides the long tempo, what type of work would you prescribe during a GPP phase (for a high school athlete with a decent background, like Oni or me)?

Without knowing you or having seen you run it’s very difficult to prescribe a session.

I can offer you an over view of what I’m about to start up, or what my training partner has been doing for the last 2 months …

[Oni]

Thanks Dazed, i understand now.

[Alex]

@Dazed

Without knowing you or having seen you run it’s very difficult to prescribe a session.

I can offer you an over view of what I’m about to start up, or what my training partner has been doing for the last 2 months …

That would be great, just post it or send it to me when you get a chance.

[nba3km]

I’d love to see it too…

[Johnny]

@Dazed

I’m glad to hear it’s worked for you, however your attitude sounds like it would be more at home in a church than it does on a discussion forum. Recognising that there are other methodologies that work very well out there, and that some might be more appropriate for individuals is in no way defying Charlie in any way, nor does it make his views and experience any less legitimate. Quite frankly if I were him, I’d find my training philosophies being transformed into dogma, far more offensive …

You’d be surprised as to what is done around the world volley ball wise to develop a high vertical. I have friends who play at Olympic and in European legues who do alot of sub maximal plyometrics to develop jump height.

As it relates to athletics, take a look at the John Smith and Clyde Hart training threads, and you will realise that speed all year round is not a necessity - and is sometimes left only to the end of the training programme. This is because all of the properties you have mentioned can be developed through sub maximal means.

Why are you reading so much venom into my post? There was NONE there when it was written. It was carefully crafted to give credit to coaches with far more experience than me, including you. I GO OUT OF MY WAY in that post to not discount yours or anybody else’s experience in the matter by saying so in those exact terms. By admitting that I am effectively a case study of one. But that doesn’t make my post irrelevant, nor does it make it inflammatory as you seem to read into it.

And don’t hand me shit about attitude, from where I sit it’s coming from you. I carefully stated that I [REPEAT: “I” ] have no business defying Charlie’s concepts, meaning with my limited sprint-specific knowledge I would have to be a fool not to take advantage of the man’s experience.

The funny thing is, I didn’t even formally disagree with you, rather simply stated my personal experience. What part of “though I can’t discount anybody else’s success with another philosophy” didn’t you understand? Still not respectful enough of your ideas am I? Should I send you love letters with kisses and hugs to comfort your fragile ego damaged because a novice would dare share his experience? You don’t like the fact that I admire the man whose methods have given me some good gains? TOO DAMN BAD!

You want to belittle my admiration for his training concepts by snidely comparing it to church worship? Saying that I’m turning it into dogma by simply agreeing with him? Making this personal when a healthy debate was just getting started?

Childish, dude.

[Oni]

yes i have read a lot about clyde hart’s training, and was planning to use them. But seeing that his 400m runners all had a background in the 200m, I planned on working on my 200m first before taking on his workout routine.

[gf_200]

@Johnny

Oni, you are new, welcome. Herb is impatient with your post likely because it shows how impatient YOU were in writing this post. You showed your impatience because you asked board members to respond to a post that was written with absolutely no research done by you in the vast archives of this forum. You can’t read for more than an hour on this site without quickly realizing that Charlie’s whole philosophy is that work should always be either above 95% or below 70%.

 And no, you don't have to buy his books to know these things, it's all here for free.  My personal opinion is you'd have to be insane not to spend 16 bucks for "Training For Speed", as it will save you hundreds of hours of grief, injury, and less than optimal results over the coming years, but I digress...[16 fu**ing dollars! Bargain of the century!]

 Anyway,  when you post a workout like that [flawed in it's most basic form] you risk losing the respect of the people who can help you because they feel that you need to help yourself out a little bit first, and then they can help you clean up the details. Respectfully, Johnny

On starting a healthy debate, read your first post again, Jonney. Inspiring debate? That accolade, as often the case on this forum, goes to Dazed. There REALLY is more than one way to skin a cat…

[no Venom intended, see where Dazed is coming from on this one ]

[AUT_71]

@Oni

yes i have read a lot about clyde hart’s training, and was planning to use them. But seeing that his 400m runners all had a background in the 200m, I planned on working on my 200m first before taking on his workout routine.

A little warning - the “Clyde Hart Tarining Schedules” around only show very old stuff. Actually they are doing lot of “real” speed work, too, like flying 60s.
All the old schedules don’t show speed work at all.
I understood that in fact neither Michael Johnson nor Wariner train like that.

As for Smith training - the posted training programs (especially 100/200m) show distances, but most of the runs do not show intensity. To me they look like something inbetween “traditional long-to-short” and Charlies approach.
Early season runs seem to be all very low intensity.

Your plan makes perfect sense to me. If you manage to drop your 200m time, you’ll run 400 considerably faster later in the season with speed endurance and special endurance work later.

Don’t get irritated - you got inbetween the fronts of a “religious war”
But me coming from a country where EVERY trainer follows traditional long-to-short i’ve seen so many athletes stagnate and/or get injured that I believe Charlie, too

[Oni]

lol. Smiths training, i haven’t seen it yet. Maybe i will go look it up now. Thanks

[Johnny]

@gf_200

On starting a healthy debate, read your first post again, Jonney. Inspiring debate? That accolade, as often the case on this forum, goes to Dazed. There REALLY is more than one way to skin a cat…

[no Venom intended, see where Dazed is coming from on this one ]

Yes, my first post to Oni was intended to help him get positive responses in the future, but looking back I can see how it would look a tad too agressive. I actually thought I was helping him craft future posts but it came off too strong. I’ll watch the tone of the posts. Cheers.

[Oni]

cheeeeeeeeeeeers =]