No worries, I fully understand the mechanism of the methodology. The issue I have is towards what applications I do or do not agree with its use.
The ‘overspeed’ if you will, that I get for my American footballers comes in the form of flying sprints out to 60yds (with 20yd pre-run).
Historically, I’d keep all sprint work under 40yds; however, after seeing the effects of the longer flying sprints on improving 40yd dash times for my pro-day/combine guys I decided to integrate them for my skill guys during the first block of summer training.
Already the results are appreciable as the longer sprints are providing the guys who still have mechanical issues in the upright position a little bit more time to work them out via a verbal cue or two over the span of the 40-60yd work distance.
Yes, the first variant would provide a meaningful stimulus as well as the second; however, in all things, in this case, the dose must be carefully administered.
This isn’t necessarily a case of ‘if 3 is good then 6 must be better’ so I’d caution against looking to create too large a stimulus in either direction (ergo the stimulatory or potentiated load)
Per your example I’d probably first go with the sled sprint with the wind, adjusting the load on the sled accordingly, or simply sprinting without the sled into the wind followed by the unloaded sprint with the wind; but again, I, personally, don’t like the idea of the potentiated sprint extending further then the 30m mark or so.
Remember, the potentiation means that you’re already operating at supra-maximal intensity so when you combine this with distances that stretch into the Max V zone I think you’re really taking your chances as unpotentiated Max V work is high stress enough as it is.
very windy day, >5+
not sure, m/s?
we often have days with wind in the mid-20 Km/h range and some considerably more;
on occasion I have had athletes run with the wind, slow, stop, turn-a-round and run with the wind, most often using approximately half into the wind as with the wind e.g. 30m + 60m and while it may have some value or I may have the numbers a bit “off” the biggest issue seemed to be the very uncontrollable nature i.e. gusts; a “useful”, steady wind is actually pretty difficult to find and that is assuming it is parallel to the track in the first place
I do not know if this has been mentioned as an overspeed method but… what about altitude training as overspeed. Less air resistance, but in very small amounts that wouldnt affect mechanics too much? Every year we see very fast times indoors from some of those meets in colorado and idaho.
Yes I agree. Doing 10s and 20s is great, but little time to correct. I also have used heavier sled sprints early in training phase to work on accel mechanics since run will require more time. This isn’t done long though and we move to lighter sled.
I also like the speeds reached in these sprints to create more reserve in the skill players.
Definitely the wisest of all options in my view; of course the challenge is a logistical one which is unlikely to be resolved by most who aren’t in a position to travel.
Yes. Historically I’ve kept the bulk of the speed work shorter; however, I’m seeing too many positives to get away from the current set up.
Essentially, the first two (of the three) blocks of summer training I construct a plan heavily influence by Charlie’s work and then the final block consists of work more biodynamically/bioenergetically specific to the game and alactic capacity is the emphasis that is realized via field drills that satisfy the positional biodynamic requirements.
What are your results in your players speed once these have been added? I have a player who is a WR in a no-huddle fast tempo offense. Speed ahs improved, but once position specific running was added, speed has decreased. Not sure if it’s over training, or a wrong balance of elements.
When we transition to alactic capacity I test my own version of a RAST that more closely relates to game energetics.
As I modify the program every year I won’t be able to tell you until July so I can compare that alactic capacity test with the one I took prior to spring ball.
Keep in mind, however, that alactic capacity is the name of the game prior to spring ball and training camp.
You’re looking for the highest repeatable level of speed. So as opposed to testing absolute speed (ergo single effort 20, 30, 40yd etc) you’ll have a much more meaningful picture of improved energetic potential via a test of alactic capacity.
So, in simple terms, now is the time to improve alactic power (peak intensity) and leading into the camp we want to improve alactic capacity (total work output)
So I compare June to June with respect to speed testing and February to July with respect to alactic capacity testing.
I explain all of this in the lecture I gave most recently that should be available in a DVD in a few weeks.
I see your points. In the end its speed during games that matters, and my guy’s playing speed is definitely improved. PM me when your DVDs come out. Thanks
I don’t want to be seen particularly as a proponent of overspeed; I just happen to know that the method Loren/Shaver have used works (in small amounts). And once again, Shaver’s people have suddenly jumped into the position of primary competitors for the NCAA track title. Does this mean they just started to do overspeed in their contrast training in the last couple of weeks? I’d love to know the answer to this, but I don’t know.
I now seem to have learned how to do this type of training without getting injured, which involves several days of rest after the contrast/overspeed. The resisted/assisted is done on a slight uphill/slight downhill next to a track. This is my cutdown phase at the end of Charlie’s SPP trapezoid (from the SPP download):
This is the cutdown phase after the real SPP that Charlie showed in the SPP lecture. For me, the first week of SPP2 is about 1500m of workouts, not counting warmups and tempo. This declines down to about 800m not counting supplementary stuff like starts by the end of the real SPP, more or less as Charlie showed it. The cutdown for me is averaging 550m, with basically 1 session of SE, one session of (over)speed, and no tempo.
John Smith does it about like this:
Last week of SPP: 4 workouts, 4 weight sessions (before track of course) lots of SE1
First cudown week: two workouts (one is only special endurance), 2 weight sessions
Second cutdown week: 1 workout, 1 start session, 2 weight sessions (VERY few reps)
Comp: no tempo, nothing over 80m or 90-90%, mostly starts and drills
The US professional season has really just started, and most people with John Smith have just started to race. Some, like Tyson and Allyson claim with a straight face that they haven’t really started speed work yet. No kidding.
Very interesting, as always in your infos…but I wanted to know how many of the days in the scheme above were complete rests, and, if no tempo, maybe circuit based?Do you have the opportunity to compete in europe also?
Like John Smith, during the cutdown period I have eliminated the tempo and the weights are also cutdown. The other days are complete rest. But the loading effect of the contrast/overspeed is so strong that even this was pushing the envelope a bit In this portion:
During the first overspeed session, which followed weights (incuding squats) by two days, there was quite a bit of hamstring pain, and this pain continued for 2 days. I was not recovered by the time of the 4X30 on May 20, and not really recovered until after the stimulus session on the 23rd. The weight loads as %1RM are in the 50-70 range that James has mentioned, but the squat session I did was clearly too much.
Before the second contrast training session, I did not do any squats and did not have the hamstring pain, so I need to either cut the squats going into a contrast training session more than I did, or insert more rest after the squats.
This is why Dennis Shaver has the very light weight session you see in the video, I guess.
I don’t think contrast training is the main reason why Dennis uses light weights etc. “Coach Shaver does much more ‘power’ development than ‘strength’ development in the weight room. His athletes tend to be beasts on the track but don’t put up huge weight room numbers”. Mike Young