Only that I’ve got my fingers crosssed for good conditions for you!
Hmmm, my best opportunity for contrast training (facilities) is tomorrow… 10 days out. I could use a HI day at 7days out (95%?), which would be slightly depleted (like you discussed in the Usain double workout thread) leading to supercompensation on comp day…
Thurs - 3x30m resisted, 3x30m overspeed, 1x80 flat.
Friday - rest
Sat - rest
Sun - 2x(3x60) 95% or 150/180/150 95%
Monday - rest
Tues - 1000m tempo
Wed - rest
Thurs - 4x20m blocks, bench
Frid - rest
Sat - warm up
Sun- race
Keep us posted on your progress! Fantastic insight!
If you gonna take lkh advice about the needed rest for overspeed then I wouldn’t do contrast training 10 days before your biggest meet. Also Sunday workout look like its too much, I would probably do 3x30, 1x150 95%.
It’s not my biggest meet… i just need some very high stimulus because I’ve missed pretty much all my speed development this year. And from what I gather I thought lkh was using it 10 days out as supercompenation and PR’s occur.
Did my contrast session today… didn’t realise what a OS playground i have at my track! Carefully manicured football pitches next to the track, slightly sloped from goal to goal and side to side… so running diagonally you can change the gradient just by adjusting the angle run at.
3x40m up hill 6mins rec.
3x30m OS 10mins
20mins
100m track
The first flying 30 was slow… 2.9 body adjusting? But the last 2 were fast… probably too fast - rough times of 2.56 and 2.60, but I felt in control always. The 100m didn’t feel too good… but that may be coming off the grass straight onto the track. There was a slight ache in the hams 10mins following the OS.
I’ll monitor the next few days and probably take tamfb advice and do 1x150 95% 0r 2 at 85-90%
I’ve been following this thread for the last few days. Awesome stuff. Just to add to the mix, you can also try an isorobic as charlie has it in CTFS. You will feel a slight over speed after a few reps with the device. I’ve tried it and it does make you feel much faster…
A few questions for LKH,
Are going going to incorporate this into the entire comp phase?
It would be really interesting for you to get access to an Omega Wave System and really monitor your CNS and other body systems while you are doing this.
Are you considering using this contrast training for the SPP next year? If so how?
The LSU approach seems to be just this one extreme workout, and then everything else is intensive tempo or starts. I don’t see how you could do the contrast training plus a race on the weekend for SE–your CNS and your hamstrings would never get a chance to recover. During comp, you normally have just the race at HI and everything else is submax, and that’s what I plan to do for comp. If you race every other weekend, you could probably fit the contrast training in there and recover, but the stimulus is so strong that I doubt going beyond 2-3 contrast workouts in a season is worth the added injury risk.
It would be really interesting for you to get access to an Omega Wave System and really monitor your CNS and other body systems while you are doing this.
Don’t have any such thing available
Are you considering using this contrast training for the SPP next year? If so how?
I didn’t know how to do this safely until tamfb posted the LSU schedule and I didn’t get it into my SPP soon enough to take advantage of what Charlie said about going back to training for 3 or 4 weeks, then try to peak. So first of all, right now I’m going to do some racing (just the race being HI, with 3X30+80 submax midweek) to find out if you get continued gains from training after the contrast training, or whether the contrast workout directly sets the peak (or does it matter?).
For next year, contrast training is one of two things I learned here. The other is John Smith and those 400 races. And I see what Carmelita Jeter got form John Smith’s experiment (more of a short-long emphasis with more starts in phase 1, more overdistance following indoors, ending with 2 400 races in the first 2 weeks of April and THEN the fastest time in the world for 100m at Mt Sac the very next weekend), Tyson Gay doing the same thing (his second 400 in 45-point) then the 3rd fastest 200 ever run as a “test of fitness” (God forbid if he actually did any speedwork!), and also Leroy Dixon running 10.00w last weekend on a non-Mondo track.
With what I’ve learned, this is what I’m thinking about doing:
First, my SPP1 is similar to Charlie’s except I have 2X200 SE (not tempo) in place of one of the 3X4X60 sessions, and I continue the SE a bit longer (concurrent training). Im going to do this one workout as 2X50(uphill) + 2X30 blocks + 2X200 (long rest) to try to get the effect PJ got with 200s after light sleds. The rest of the SPP1 is like Charlie has outlined, ending with 3X60s.
For SPP2:
Starting SPP2 (ignoring, weights, tempo, starts)
Mon 4X60
Tue 300-200-100
Fri 2X3X80
Ending (2 weeks in a row for first 2 weeks in April)
Tue 4X50 + 100
Thu weights
Sat 400 race
Following 100m at Mt Sac (i.e., Carmelita’s schedule), the cutdown to comp
Wed 2X50 slight uphill + 2X30 overspeed + 100m flat
Sun 3X100 + 2X50
Thu 2X50 slight uphill + 2X30 overspeed + 100m flat
COMP
Tue: 3X30 + 80 all submax
Sat 100m or 100+200 race
So why the 400s though? Anyone know the thinking behind it? Just theory or some science? Obviously it seems to work.
Note on Tyson Gay : During ress conference after the 19.58, he said that he hadn’t start speed work, I.E.fast 30s or 60s (he said he still did a few of these), but his coach mentioned that he ran the 120s at training faster than ever and he said that it’s actually speed work.
I’d better tell you how I got on today after using contast training 10 days out. This is how the last two weeks have looked.
Sun - Comp: 11.33… Bad meet, wet track, headwind.
Mon - Rest
Tues - Tempo 1600
Wed - Rest
Thurs - 3x40 uphill, 30x30m os, 1x100 flat.
Fri - Rest
Sat - Rest
Sun - Tempo 1200
Monday - (back home with coach) Short approach box jumps, 4x20m, 3x15hypes, 5,5,3,failure A2G squats.
Tues - Rest (big DOMS)
Wed - Tempo 1200 (DOMS)
Thurs - 2x10, 2x30, 2x40 blocks, 2x5xWeighted dips (no bench available)
Fri - Rest
Sat - Warm-up
Sun - Comp, 10.96 semi. 10.78 final.
0.55s drop…
Now I have a dilemma… should I compete on Wednesday or not??
It was cold today but Wednesday is meant to be real warm…
where you gonna compete on wed ? was that a PB its a big jump from previous run
It’s an open in Birmingham… that is a PB over 100, however, I rarely compete over 100m. I ran 6.94 electronic and 6.8x hand-time (both are competition times) two winters ago so 10.78 was within my capabilities… but not in my current state after no real training since xmas. I reckon the conrast training pushed it forward.
0.55s according to my calculation. Well done! How did wind and weather compare to the 11.33 race?
I wouldn’t compete on Wednesday unless it’s an important competition. You’ve just come back from a major injury and wouldn’t want to hurt yourself now that you are finally back in shape.
That’s my CNS fatigue talking! (I’ll edit that)
11.33 was a wet track, no wind reading but i guess maybe a -2. It was cold today, around 10 degrees. The wind readings were +1, however, it’s a half stadium and the wind swirls. It was definately a headwind during drive phase, but caught my back midway.
How did you perform your overspeed sprints? Hill? Pulley? Wind-Assisted?
What is the recommended decline (degrees) for overspeed ?
Sorry if it’s written here somwhere.
Is it wise to perform 9 days out of a big meet ?
Is it wise to perform 2-2.5 months after a G2 tear, in perfect shape and condition though ? I now the “safe” answer is no, but I have run 100’s races since the tear…
Hmmm cheater you compete today at the midland champs? Wednesday rowheath? Lol I maybe down to do a 4 been injured since April with Achilles lol but may knock out an easy run
Here is some relevant research. Please note that the first two studies only assess differences in speed and not safety or training efficacy of running on different slopes.
The optimal downhill slope for acute overspeed running.Ebben WP.
Dept of Physical Therapy, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA.
PURPOSE: This study evaluated a variety of downhill slopes in an effort to determine the optimal slope for overspeed running. METHODS: Thirteen NCAA Division III college athletes who participated in soccer, track, and football ran 40-yd (36.6-m) sprints, on downhill slopes of 2.1 degrees , 3.3 degrees , 4.7 degrees , 5.8 degrees , and 6.9 degrees in random order. All sprints were timed using the Brower Timing System Speedtrap II. Data were analyzed with SSPS 15.0. A 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed significant main effects for the test slopes (P = .000). Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons determined that there were a number of differences between the hill slopes. RESULTS: Analysis reveals that 40-yd sprints performed on hill slopes of approximately 5.8 degrees were optimal compared with flatland running and the other slopes assessed (P < .05). Sprinting on a 5.8 degrees slope increased the subjects’ maximal speed by an average of 0.35 s, resulting in a 6.5% +/- 4.0% decrease in 40-yd sprint time compared with flatland running. Compared with the 4.7 degrees slope, the 5.8 degrees slope yielded a 0.10-s faster 40-yd sprint time, resulting in a 1.9% increase in speed. CONCLUSIONS: Those who train athletes for speed should use or develop overspeed hills with slopes of approximately 5.8 degrees to maximize acute sprinting speed. The results of this study bring into question previous recommendations to use hills of 3 degrees downhill slope for this form of overspeed training.
The same study, but with more participants:
1: J Strength Cond Res. 2008 May;22(3):898-902.Links
Effect of the degree of hill slope on acute downhill running velocity and acceleration.Ebben WP, Davies JA, Clewien RW.
Department of Physical Therapy, Program in Exercise Science, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. webben70@hotmail.com
This study analyzes the effects of hill slope on acute overspeed running. This study considers both acceleration and supramaximal velocity. Forty-four athletes ran 40-yard sprints, on 5 different hill slopes, ranging from 2.1 degrees to 6.9 degrees . Forty-yard sprint times and 10-yard split times were recorded using the Brower Timing System Speedtrap II. Analysis reveals that 40-yard and 10-yard sprints performed on hill slopes of approximately 5.8 degrees were optimal compared to flatland running and the other slopes assessed. Sprinting on a 5.8 degrees slope increased the subjects’ maximal speed by 7.09% +/- 3.66% and increased the subjects’ acceleration by 6.54% +/- 1.56%. Strength and conditioning professionals who train athletes for speed should develop and use overspeed hills or platforms with slopes of approximately 5.8 degrees in order to maximize acute sprinting velocity and acceleration.
Something on resisted sprints:
J Strength Cond Res. 2008 May;22(3):890-7.Links
Effects of three types of resisted sprint training devices on the kinematics of sprinting at maximum velocity.Alcaraz PE, Palao JM, Elvira JL, Linthorne NP.
Kinesiology and Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia, Guadalupe, Murcia, Spain. palcaraz@pdi.ucam.edu
Resisted sprint running is a common training method for improving sprint-specific strength. For maximum specificity of training, the athlete’s movement patterns during the training exercise should closely resemble those used when performing the sport. The purpose of this study was to compare the kinematics of sprinting at maximum velocity to the kinematics of sprinting when using three of types of resisted sprint training devices (sled, parachute, and weight belt). Eleven men and 7 women participated in the study. Flying sprints greater than 30 m were recorded by video and digitized with the use of biomechanical analysis software. The test conditions were compared using a 2-way analysis of variance with a post-hoc Tukey test of honestly significant differences. We found that the 3 types of resisted sprint training devices are appropriate devices for training the maximum velocity phase in sprinting. These devices exerted a substantial overload on the athlete, as indicated by reductions in stride length and running velocity, but induced only minor changes in the athlete’s running technique. When training with resisted sprint training devices, the coach should use a high resistance so that the athlete experiences a large training stimulus, but not so high that the device induces substantial changes in sprinting technique. We recommend using a video overlay system to visually compare the movement patterns of the athlete in unloaded sprinting to sprinting with the training device. In particular, the coach should look for changes in the athlete’s forward lean and changes in the angles of the support leg during the ground
A study arguing for contrast training:
J Strength Cond Res. 2006 Nov;20(4):767-77.Links
The effects of sprint running training on sloping surfaces.Paradisis GP, Cooke CB.
Track and Field Unit, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Athens, Athens, Greece. gparadi@phed.uoa.gr
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of sprint running training on sloping surfaces (3 degrees ) on selected kinematic and physiological variables. Thirty-five sport and physical education students were randomized into 4 training groups (uphill-downhill, downhill, uphill, and horizontal) and a control group, with 7 participants in each group. Pre- and posttraining tests were performed to examine the effects of 6 weeks of training on the maximum running speed at 35 m, step rate, step length, step time, contact time, eccentric and concentric phase of contact time, flight time, selected posture characteristics of the step cycle, and peak anaerobic power performance. Maximum running speed and step rate were increased significantly (p < 0.05) in a 35-m running test after training by 0.29 m.s(-1) (3.5%) and 0.14 Hz (3.4%) for the combined uphill-downhill group and by 0.09 m.s(-1) (1.1%) and 0.03 Hz (2.4%) for the downhill group, whereas flight time shortened only for the combined uphill-downhill training group by 6 milliseconds (4.3%). There were no significant changes in the horizontal and control groups. Overall, the posture characteristics and the peak anaerobic power performance did not change with training. It can be suggested that the novel combined uphill-downhill training method is significantly more effective in improving the maximum running velocity at 35 m and the associated horizontal kinematic characteristics of sprint running than the other training methods are.
A study arguing against the exclusive use of resisted sprints or overspeed:
J Strength Cond Res. 2006 Nov;20(4):833-7.Links
Velocity specificity in early-phase sprint training.Kristensen GO, van den Tillaar R, Ettema GJ.
Human Movement Sciences Programme, SVT, NTNU, Norway.
A comparison of resistance running, normal sprint running, and supramaximal running was performed. Nineteen young, generally well-trained subjects were divided into 3 training groups: resistance, normal, and supramaximal groups. Resistance and supramaximal training was done using a towing device, providing extra resistance or propulsion forces, resulting in running speed differences of about 3.3% (supramaximal) and 8.5% (resistance), compared to normal sprinting. The training period was 6 weeks, with 3 training sessions per week (5 sprint-runs over 22 m). Running times were measured using photocells, and average step length and cadence were recorded by digital video. A small (0.5%) but significant (p < 0.05) overall pre-post difference was found in running velocity, but the 3 groups changed differently over the running conditions. All individual subjects improved sprinting velocity most on the trained form, at 1-2% (p < 0.001), and thus, the principle of velocity specificity in sprint training was supported. This indicates that to obtain short-distance sprinting improvement in a short period of time, one may prefer normal sprinting over other training forms.
Great material ! All saved, thank you very much !