Has anyone tried this? I’ve been thinking about bounding on a low incline (5-10 Degrees) to increase the horizontal pushing action. I’ve always found the problem with bounding is maintaining the same amoung of push horizontally and the bounds take more of a vertical component with speed (either that or you spend all your energy just maintaining air time and exagerrating the push off). Like lunging, I think that this type of bounding could help body angle (when I think about it, it’s just like what charlie says about hill running: when you can’t change the angle of the athlete, change the angle of the surface!!). Any thoughts?
I have used incline bounding in the gpp, but mainly for triple jump training so I haven’t thought about the sprint element. Although I think it has contributed to my acceleration also.
i have tried incline bounds in last seasons gpp and i must say that the benefits are far better than horizontal bounds. my standing l.jump imroved 10cim in 3weeks of doing so.
My previous coach (on a long to short program) was a big advocate of jumps before hill sessions … they might be useful if used in appropriate amounts and but not when looking for more to add as that coach did.
In gpp I had my aths sprint the profile of the hills (maybe 200m, angle only about 5-8 degrees), then do double-footed hops partway up the side of the hill (distance maybe 10 hops, angle maybe 50-degrees). Always on grassy surface. Aimed more at power endurance. Had one woman Leanne aged mid-to-late 20s who had never broken 12sec and ran 11.59sec legal fully auto at the nationals back in about 1987? People laughed at us then but I think it didn’t hurt the athletes and I’m persdonally convinced it did help in the power-endurance area and force-application area as well. Easier to maintain pelvic position in the hops because you’re not reaching for distance, perhaps due to fact the ground rises to meet you at contact.
Bounding on a slight incline can be helpful- usually early in the training where the emphasis is on acceleration. Often the Europeans use incline, then flat, then slight downhill bounds as they progress through the season. I’ve used both incline and flat, but havn’t used downhill bounds.
Bounds can be used as part of strength end as well. Gerrard Mach used to use flat bounds to 80m, directly into 200m tempo, directly into 50m running As. Now that’s tough!
This is strength end, like the running As for longer duration. I don’t really know what you mean by power endurance. Sorry, I wrote special end instead of the correct strength end in my earlier post. I will correct it now!
charlie, i have a question, would these fit during special endurance days, or where would these go? Strength endurance is a good part of football…so where would itd place go? Would they go on the inbetween day in place of speed endurance? Thanks again.
Easy to get tripped up by semantics. Charlie calls it strength-endurance; I call it power-endurance. We’re probably talking about the same thing (Charlie??)
For my part I’ve always considered the longer sprints (400m and 200m) as essentially power-endurance races. That is both events (and the last 40m, say, of the 100) require the athlete to sustain/endure a powerful sprint action.
We may talk blythely of “floating or coasting” through a section of the 400m (backstraight?) but in reality to maintain velocity even in the 400m backstraight requires input of a powerful action to sustain turnover rate. And from 200m to home there is a high degree of power endurance required to maintain momentum as much as possible through a still quite explosive (motor) pattern.
So, yes, there is a place for power-endurance work in all sprints if you see what I mean by that term. In the 400m I would say it is the priority.
As for siting of P-E in your program, that is a matter of preference for you. It can be sited the day after a rest-day if the session is such a tear-down job that you couldn’t contemplate coming into the session pre-fatigued from work performed a day earlier.
Or it could come third-day, after neural day, then stress-recovery (speed-endurance) day, followed finally by the P-E (also termed S-E, if the emphasis is more on the volume of plyo activity [integrated with sprints or drills] rather than reactive quality [ie: intensity] off the floor).
So you can play with the emphasis to suit your individual needs at any particular time of the year. And then you may choose therefore to change the terminology.
BUt the essential rules of siting sessions remain unchanged. You want to minimise risk of injury and maximise potential to absorb the training and gain the training effect desired. So generally speaking you don’t really want to destroy yourself on Day-1 and then do highly complex neural development at high velocity on Day-2. That is just begging injury, obviously.
I’m sure we’re referring to the same thing and the principles are the same. I just don’t like to mix the terms power and end, as, strictly speaking, there is a conflict between the pursuit of these separate qualities.
Charlie,
since the above sounds a good idea and because i’m trying to save some time during training -not ideal, but…- would these incline bounds be better executed before the hill (or track accel in a while) sessions, instead of doing some upwards plyos after squats? the latter feels too heavy sometimes… i was thinking perhaps some power work when you re rested would be good before running; let me know what you think!
thanks!
That’s highly individual. you could split the bounds and do a few before the hill accels and the rest after of (my preference) bounds on one hill day and accels on the other(s) I wouldn’t do plyos after squats (though I know this is popular).
would a similar gradient of 150m be of use in this area ?