Chris, i don’t think the 5 x 100m tempo on the grass followed by a 150m spikes at 95% s a good idea because this is 2 seperate cessions you can take benefits from. Make 2 cessions in 1 isn’t like shampoo, at training it often divides the benefits. :-). But if your goal is not regenerative tempo or high quality SE, but take the heat out like says kitkat and still work endurance, that’s a good cession. Actually, my problem with the depletion races is that it’s quite hard to monitor, but kitkat has much more experience than me on that.
Second remark : after a lactic cession (i suppose your hill cession is a lactic one), it is recommended to not do weights the very next day, because of the risk to bulk up and because body hasn’t beeen cleaned from the traumatism for lactic. I completely agree with what kk says.
For my 100/200m runner, we haven’t trained the 200m specifically at the time he did his fine 200m comps, actually, at this time, we haven’t done any work at 100% for distances longer than 120m. The longer distances (up to 400m) have started at 80% speed, and throught the season, the intensity increase, and the distance decrease. Note that for these special endurance workouts, we start with 60m reps (2 to 6) in a certain way, and now we finish the last rep of SE at free speed, can be a 200m at 95%. The volume of SE per workout can be regarded as very low. Anyway, for an other sprinter, i probably use different workouts, his training is designed for his own abilities and needs at a given time, not necessarily for an other sprinter. He is probably the world class sprinter who trains the less. But i have the chance he is so talented, so i use it.
At the risk of this reading like the minutes of the last mutual admiration society meeting, I completely agree with PJ about the shampoo. I never found conditioner mixed with the soap worked too well for me .
No really, the sub 70%-speed tempo is for recovery. The 150s sessin is to kill you softly, but kill you :eek: anyhow. The fourth 150 done at 100% effort is definitely not going to leave you flushed free of lactic acid and feeling ready to rock the next day.
Don’t mix them. Well, you could do a couple of sets of the 4x150, take a decent rest and then do a tempo session by way of an extended warmdown. But it’s still mixing apples and potatoes.
Chris, you haven’t been clear (or if I’ve missed it I apologise) about the phase of training your sample week is from. If it’s in-competition, or even pre-comp, I think I’d be wanting a second speed development day.
So Day 6 (Friday) looks the best option to site such a session because it follows a rest day.
Maybe if you cycle through the weeks, you can design another week which has a hill session instead of a 150s session.
So if the sample week with the hill session in it also has a another session of longer work (say, 300 sprints or 200+200) that can be a week targeting your 400m needs, then you can cycle back into say two weeks of more classical sprint development training aimed at enhancing your 100m and 200m potential.
Then you have a three-week block. You could look to race at the end of a lighter fourth week. Maybe race for another week or two after that, then go back into your three-week block again.
Itr’s just semantics, sorry. By “targeted muscular endurance” I just mean training the endurance specific (or approximately specific) to the needs of the event(s) you want to contest.
If you’re only going to compete at 100m, then running repeat hills 360m long with jog down recoveries is probably a waste of your time and effort. But probably not a waste if you want to run some decent 400m races by late summer.
But some 100m/200m endurance training will also help your 400m because there are elements of the short sprints common to the longer sprint.
In the 400 thread I answered a question from Oni about what he might use to bridge strength earned in the gym and convert it to the track for 400m (and long jump) in the absence of hills. I proposed a combination set (sled-skip-run). That’s targetting muscular endurance in a particular way. Your suggestion of Running A-s is another, but I’ve never used them so I can’t comment.
I would just say that if the work you do is performed with good form - ie, driving through the hips with triple extension beneath the torso and sustained through to toe-off - then you will gain a good effect from your training.
If you do more repeats of that work (be it track sprints, plyos, hills, sleds) then you will develop “targeted” muscular endurance. No doubt there will be some cardio-vascular endurance developed too.
The training you do will transfer successfully to the competition so long as your mechanics are sound through the training.
Once your technique breaks down (due to fatigue) it’s time to stop the rep, stop the set or stop the session (if, after a rest, you still cannot continue with good mechanics, ie triple extension, quick contact time on the floor)
kk
I’ve been studying this thread and it’s quite informative … thanks!
One question regarding 2x3x200 session you mentioned above. In the example you gave with a target time in the 26sec range, would it be better in the early season to run the 200 slower (i.e. 28-29 sec range) with the same 2min rec, or stay at the desired pace of 26sec and increase the recovery time to 3-4 min until one progresses down to desired session?
Either option is OK. I prefer to “bite the bullet” and go to the desired target time (in this case 26sec-27sec) as soon as possible.
But it does depend on a few things: the athlete’s level of fitness when s/he starts this training; The level of aspiration and pain tolerance of the athlete; and how the relative speeds (of a 26sec 200 as against a 29sec 200m) affect technical form.
If the answer to any of these questions is “poor” then that will inform your choice.
My own preference is to get after the target because it takes a while to stablise in that band of speed (and lactic tolerance) and to develop specific strength to sustain the mechanics used there which will be needed to hold form in the race .
kk
wouldn’t it be better to progressively decrease 200s time for any athlete and/or change the recovery periods at the same time (e.g., reduction of recovery for “establishment”/confirmation of a certain speed) until you reach the desired session?
as you say, of course, it depends on the athlete, indeed, but i was just wondering if this way is better for avoidance of any plateaues perhaps caused by running at the same speed for a long period of time; unless the alteration of recovery periods alone during this time takes care of this…
In a way, your use of “plateau” describes in a rare positive sense of the word, exactly what I’ve tried to achieve by targeting the come-home (last 200m) pace of your race time-goal.
It’s simplistic to say it like this, but a woman aiming to run 50-flat needs to be able to come home in 26sec (ballpark figure, could be sub-26 or high-26 depending on splits during the first 300m of course). She needs to be able to stick onto that pace come hell or high water (lactic acid level?). [We’ve discussed this a bit earlier in this thread somewhere].
There should be so much going on everywhere else in the training, varying distance, speeds and recoveries that creating the normally unwanted dynamic stereotype (of 26sec for backup 200m in this case) does not inhibit capacities in any other respect.
But as I keep saying, there’s more than one way up the mountain. Experimentation will find other paths, some of which will no doubt be better than the one I’ve found for the 400m runners I have worked with/for. I’m just sharing what I’ve learned on my own coaching journey. I have nothing more than that to offer, other than speculation.
thanks for this KitKat; you know the forum appreciates your comments and ask no more than that!
and i was asking just for that, your experiences and now i am clear! I suppose if you are effective enough you can avoid the stereotype and move towards a positive plateau towards new PBs!
I respect the fact that even though you’ve coached a 44sec sprinter and other world class athlete’s, you don’t come off as being an arrogant know it all when it comes to 400m training…
Btw, your posts are informative and well appreciated…
As always, your insight is greatly appreciated. After thinking about it, maintaining target speed does make better sense for me. I will be working at my “come home” pace from the start … and practice makes perfect
I wish I could give you definitive advice on this, but I can only go with my experience again. I have had it in my own head that the ability to run 5x200 or 6x200 in the comehome pace of your target 400m - and do them all at that pace, and all with 2mins or less time as recovery between reps - makes the athlete bullet-proof in the tournament situation and in the one-off race.
Of course the ability to run a very fast 300m, 200m, 150m etc is crucial to success at 400m if you come from the speed-end especially (as distinct from the 800m-type of endurance-end).
Chris I cannot find where you nominated a 400 target (realistic). You’ve said though that you want to run 26sec for the last 200m of your 400m which suggests your goal is 50-flat.
If you wanted to hedge your bets and go more for 200m performance with a decent 400m in there as well in the coming season, then perhaps 2 x (2x200m) is your best option.
Even so, this is still an endurance session. You can play with the variables at different times of the year. I would still work around the 2mins recovery, but vary the pace of the 200m runs.
As written earlier in the thread, the 2(2x200m) is derived from the 6x200m continuous. But on occasions I’ve had athletes go near to race pace with the first 200m of their target 400m time, then take 2mins, then hit the backup rep in close to the same time or even negative-split. Of course if something amazing happens and you happen to run the first 200m in a PB, then I’d be scrapping the backup rep for fear of over-doing it. :eek: “Dead” heroes are no good to anyone. kk
.
