It should be noted that the 3 groups improved everywhere (accel, max speed, SE and 100m), but in various extends. From this study, and confirmed by Letzelter’s findings, the best method was the 3rd, combining short and long jumps. My practical application of this is to use short jumps as (or in alternace) acceleration workouts, and long jumps as (or in alternance) SE workouts.
I’m not sure to understand, but for “up & down” boundings, is it performed with straight legs? Anyway, i don’t think there is a Conflict 
between the two, as the “up& down” plyo seems in the mid way between short and long jumps, shorts beeing for acceleration and long for SE, the combinasion of the 2 or, in this case, a mid-way between the 2, develops max speed.
yes, i remember what you were saying; there is a very logical progression to what you’ve planned and i can’t see why not working! the idea of the acceleration combined with the SE sessions makes more sense to me as time goes by and it’ll be very interesting to hear your results!
i suppose the 500s are testing like sessions on seperate occasions with plenty of recovery between, as you are saying; yes, that’s good! what about the 200s? i’ve heard of a race simulation doing 2x200s with little recovery (1min if i’m correct) trying to beat your 400m time overall; do you mean something similar (simulation), or more of a speed endurance work (vs. special end)? is is the latter? as you are talking about speed reserve…
please, let us know how it goes! it should be interesting…
hope you see better results than the expected!
i think we are in full agreement about this! huh!
the slightest of differences is that in the acceleration phase i used plyos that were upwards, but with the ground meeting the feet (i.e., on a hill/grass) to avoid impact early on, now normal plyos up & down for speed (not straight legs; high knee jumps if you want, over hurdles/cones, etc) with some light “longer” plyos
for the SE phase i was thinking emphasising the long plyos and actually i wasn’t sure about this, but since you agree as well, it seems that it’ll work fine!
the fact that you are not emphasising the “mid” part of the plyos is fine by me, since it suits best your schedule for 400m!
No conflict :eek:
if anyone desagrees with this progression, suggestions/concerns, please, let us know sooner rather than later!
The 500s will be actually a single time trial, and concerning the 2 x 200 with 1min recovery, i don’t think i will do that because it’s very hard and i want the athlete to have more background before reaching this workout level. I was thinking about to something like 100m flying start sub12sec, then 220m (120m relax+100m fast), 180m (80rlx + 100fst), 150m (50rlx + 100fst), with “enough” recoveries. I will give the results but so many things i can’t control can happen…
Yes, those longer split runs (2x200 with 1min recovery) are pretty hard. Making sure the athlete is ready for it is a very good idea…
One of my favorite quotes from that movie 
500s: that’s what i meant and the full “recovery” was from one test to the other…
2x200m, 1min rec: have never tried it, exactly because as you say it always seems to hard just for a session; it’s much closer to a 400m race to me vs. the 500m…
relaxed-fast: this is good for maintaining good mechanics throughout, i suppose…
don’t worry about other things; as you say, you can’t control them…
still prefer your signature though… 
Me too…
100m flying start sub12sec, then 220m (120m relax+100m fast), 180m (80rlx + 100fst), 150m (50rlx + 100fst), with “enough” recoveries
so wat component in the 100m is this exactly working on? is this considered speed or special endurance, coming to think about it it can also hit top speed pretty well
This is the kind of workout it will be plan for a 400m runner to get in shape for 200m race. Recoveries will be “enough” in order to have high quality technique.
Hello PJ, et al.
Regarding the 400m. These are some of my thoughts…
The 400 is a power-endurance sprint, involving a high degree of technical excellence, and the ability to maintain time-specific rhythm(s) (ie: tactical judgement) from start to finish.
From what I have read in this thread, there seems to be a slight reluctance to be SPECIFIC about targeting speed outcomes, ie: goals.
Don’t hide from speed:
Establish your target times for your athlete and get after them. Go hard. This is the toughest race in terms of enduring pain, so this must be factored heavily into the preparation.
Philosophy and Purpose of Training:
Establish in the athlete’s mind the ideal technique for this athlete. Use drills, feedback, strengthening, flexibility, massage, etc etc etc so that the athlete is “free” to assume the optimal technical position(s) during the sprint stride cycle.
Then in my opinion the purpose of training is to enable this athlete to maintain his/her optimal technique for as long as possible under the various pressure of race circumstances - ie: high speed, high fatigue.
Planning:
Don’t waste any time getting down to the issues from the first cycle of preparation.
The challenge is to develop all the threads of performance: ie speed, strength, stamina, suppleness, style and [p]sychology.
How you do this is a great challenge. It is the key to everything. Program theories abound. But there are three main theories _ short-to-long, long-to-short or concurrent (ie: short-and-long).
I prefer concurrent development.
For the following reasons: It takes a very long time to develop elite qualities for special speed endurance, and also for the endurance involved in running the last 100m of a 400m in under 12sec for a male, under 14sec for a female when running off competitive opening 300m times of m32/f36 sec.
The sooner the athlete starts to develop the qualities needed to finish the 400m at such a level the better. Anything less than these levels will not enable a 400m sprinter to consider Olympic finals.
Of course if that is the championship target, then preparation for multiple rounds places an even greater need to start early.
Practical experience suggests it requires something like 10 months to develop the tolerance to run the final 100m off 300m in the split times referred to above.
The Endurance Paradox:
In order to accomplish significant endurance training sets, a relatively high degree of speed is desirable for the athlete at the same stage of training. Hence my preference for the “concurrent” program theory.
Sometimes “less is more”; sometimes the more you try for strength the weaker you become.
It is (in my opinion) highly desirable that the 400m runner does not lose much speed throughout the year. This then will enable the athlete to have a “cushion” or “reserve time” with which to get through the early repetitions of a tough endurance set and still hold form (ie: triple extension, etc) for the rest of the set.
For instance: a typical session I have used to lay the strength base for the 400m race is 6x200m in the come-home speed for the target-time 400m, with jog-200m recoveries (must be run under 2mins).
For a male hoping to eventually run 400m in 44-flat the objective of this session is to run 6x200m in 23sec with jog recoveries as above. For a female hoping to run 400m in 50-flat the objective is to run 6x200m in 26sec with jog recoveries, as above.
Race Modelling:
The training target times in the 6x200m (which ultimately collapses to 2x200m off 2mins at race-specific splits) are based simply on the most common race models.
The models are: 400m in 44.0sec (1st 200m in 21sec, last 200m in 23sec); 400m in 50.0sec (1st 200m in 24sec, last 200m in 26sec).
Obviously there will be variations to these models based on the type of athlete involved. Some have great speed at 100m and 200m, others have endurance capacity suggestive of 800m talents.
Athletes with whom I developed my own training model had modest career personal best 100m times of 10.4el (male) and 11.6el (female). Outcomes at 400m: 44.3el (third round) and 50.2el (third round).
Program Structure:
I prefer concurrent development basically from Day 1.
I have found best results following a weekly pattern of two days training, one day rest, three days training, one day rest.
The general prep cycle is basically two x six-weeks of training.
But my experience indicates a dynamic stereotype is established firmly after as little as three weeks.
Therefore to avoid this problem, I loosely divide the six-week cycle as follows: first two-and-a-half weeks can be described as strength & endurance. The second two-and-a-half weeks can be described as speed & power.
The sixth week is what I term a “rest and test” week, involving time and gym-strength tests on two weeks separated by at least 48 hours.
This enables me to keep a close eye on technical development (or deviations) and allows me to stop any dynamic stereotype or fatigue-related issues before they become a threat to the yearly goals.
later…kk
Hey KK …good stuff! I see what Charlie meant when he recommend for Dazed to get in touch with you. I bet you could have him go from 45.90 to 44.90 within a relatively short time.
Dazed, hook up with KK thank me later
This is one of the best posts I have read on this forum!
You discussed the 6 x 200 workout which I think I can derive progressions from pretty easily.
How would you tackle the speed component? (Short speed)
What would be a sample short speed/power workout?
Cheers and thanks!
Chris
Hi Chris, PJ et al
Short speed development:
Two days per week during the speed-power period of the general prep 2x6wk block and thereafter every week, except when we may opt to return to a similar GP block to insert another little wedge of basic training as the season progresses and opportunity or necessity may arise.
The speed development days always follow the Rest days, so that the sprinter is as fresh as can be managed thereby enhancing the prospect of establishing better neural patterns in the relative absence of fatigue which causes interference and therefore potentially injury.
Charlie is the best reference for anything to do with speed development. There is nobody - and there has never been anybody - to match his knowledge. I mostly use a short-to-long approach to this issue, as does CF I believe.
My speed sessions usually start in earnest with 2 x 2 x 40-20-20 (where the first 40m of thereabouts is acceleration from a standing, crouch or flying start, the middle 20m or less is a max velocity/lift zone, and the last 20m or so is an exit zone where velocity maintainance with emphasis on relaxation can be rehearsed.
Establishing the race model:
I realise that achieving max acceleration and max velocity usually takes at least 60m of max effort sprinting to fulfil, but in training specifically for 400m there is less emphasis on the need to achieve 100m-like acceleration values.
More important is to develop the “feeling” of arriving at the 60m zone in a fully upright “lift” (ie: triple extension) position with optimal speed after which relaxation and form become the next target objectives.
This requires considerable rehearsal because, like most other tactical and technical aspects of the 400m, the execution will need to be accomplished under extreme duress in a race when the poorly-drilled competitor will often 
lose proprioceptive awareness in the heat of the moment.
Therefore we do a huge amount of race modelling throughout the year - eventually working into and out of the bends - although mostly on speed development days and on the day before any race.
Skipping:
I saw that PJ likes to use skipping. I do too (not with a rope). I like the fact that skipping horizontally is a gentle but explosive activity which encourages triple joint extension (hip, knee, ankle - in that sequence) and “active” ground contact.
For me, skipping is a safer alternative to bounding. I often see athletes :eek: failing to achieve triple extension and a neutral pelvic position while bounding, which is not particularly productive and is definitely an injury risk to lower spine/groin areas.
I often use skipping on flat grassy surface 2-3 x 100m alternating with acceleration and some sled-resistance work. (eg: 2x80m build-up, 2x80m skipping, 2x60m light sled or resistance cord)
So I make up compound sets - from 3-6, but when done in volume this session takes on the characteristics of a power-endurance session for which of course there is always a place in any of the sprint events.
There’s nothing special that I do in the short-speed development area, or for that matter in any other area. It’s just how everything works together, how much time the coach can afford to give the athlete, how much talent the athlete has, and at what stage of development the athlete is at which determines the specifics of the training work and the outcomes.
MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE, A SAFE AND HAPPY FESTIVE SEASON TO ALL
kk
Thanks for the information, Merry Christmas to you as well!
Quick question on the skipping portion. Can you describe the skipping movement you are performing? Are you skipping with alternate legs down the track or stationary etc?
Thanks again,
Chris
Hello Chris,
The answer was in the post, “I often use skipping on flat grassy surface 2-3 x 100m” — etc.
I prefer skipping alternative legs over a distance of about 100m. That can be surprisingly fatiguing. PJ’s idea of going out to 250m is very interesting but I suspect form may suffer.
When I see a breakdown in form, my attitude always is to either stop the repetition, stop the set or stop the session - depending on whether the athlete can regain form after a period of rest.
I know a lot of athletes have used rope skipping on the spot, but I’m not a fan.
There are so many different things you can do in training that can contribute to improving an athlete’s performance. But you cannot fit everything in. So in the final analysis I have just tried to find things (drills etc) that suit my purposes. I only use three drills. The rest as far as I’m concerned is :eek: window-dressing.
Merry Christmas all
kk
Folks you just don’t get any better then KitKat talking about his favorite event, the 400 meters, with his philosophy and Charlie’s knowledge on speed I ran 57 @ 57 years old last summer in the 400, listen to these guys it works.
Merry Christmas!
Hallafmr
Great Info!
Hi! a few Qs, if i may…
i understand what you are saying about special endurance pacing according to individual’s ability, that it takes long time (i.e., 10mo) and should start early on and your preference to a concurrent approach
my question is: would you try to develop speed and special endurance at the same time throughout the season? if yes, from your experience, do you think this is possible and you can take full advantage from the development of the two?
i am asking this because of PJ’s comments, where he targets accel and special endurance work, but not speed work along with special endurance to a great extent (his example being the comparison between Ottey and Privalova in a previous page)
[PJ, sorry if i am saying something wrongly here; let us know]
if not, would you focus more on speed first, or special endurance within a season? for example, within a 6wk cycle you seem to prefer the focus on speed later on; is this true? But, if you want to have the cushion you are saying above, wouldn’t speed come first to allow you finishing sessions like those involving the 200s? or, as i understand it from your second post, is it just the focus shifting from cycle to cycle, maintaining those elements already improved? i.e., both developed within a season, which brings me to my first point (a possible conflict -my favourite word, you see)
just trying to clarify what you are saying… i understand that a few things and their manipulation will depend on strengths/weaknesses of the individual
thanks!
and All of You Guys, Have a Nice Time Over Xmas!