Key to this photo is the inside thigh continues to reach approximately parallel position to the track when the athlete runs the bend. The arm action continues to be active, notably in the back-swing with elbow angle open to around 90-degrees. The lead hand moves toward the centre of the torso (but not across the imaginary split line) and the hand does not rise above shoulder height. The athlete’s jaw hangs loosely (no obvious tension). The shoulders are dropped and the head is held upright and in line with the rest of the spinal column (not tilted).
I will try to follow your training schedule after next week. After reading some times almost everything of this thread (although I have missed a lot of things for sure) I have some questions that I would like to ask, right now related to the GPP. As a non-english native speaker I will try to be clear, although I am not really sure that I will be able to (I will write the week that I will ask the question of before the question itself). Also, I would like to “ask” something just to be sure…
Related to the first week of your GPP:
As the 2-3x4x150m (day 1)are in the first day after rest, I assume that they’re not tempo (they’re not 12x150m at 23"). Should they be done at the same pace of the last 200m? (for example: for a 48" guy, in high 18)…
I am also wondering about the feeling that the body should have after the trainings. Should we end bad (cursing the trainer, for example) after the hills or the 5-6x200m???
What is the intensity of the sprints ladder of day 1? Just as fast as possible so we can end the train? Maybe I have understand it bad, but should only be done some of those distances?
On day 4, those has to be made with r: 30"-walkback-full recovery. I was also guessing what is the intensity of each 300, 250,… and 60m… Something close to the pace of the last meters?
On day 1 and day 4: also a pace close to the last X meters of the 400? Faster for the 150?
I have tried not to repeat questions that you have answered before, unless I have found different answers that I have missunderstood.
Rather than use the word “tempo” which has traditional connotations, I prefer these days to go with “rhythm” (as I think it more adequately conveys my intent) and sets such as 2-3 x 4x150m (or 5-6 x 200m; 3x3x300m) can be thought of in terms of locking on to a running rhythm which is appropriate to your current level of fitness at the time of the training.
The 150 reps in 23sec are a time nominated for training on a grass track. They are also very easy to start General Preparation Phase training with.
The degree of difficulty in this set can be increased according to your readiness. My top guy never ran as slow as 23sec. He was often around 18sec as you suggest. But the set is designed as 1 x150 sprint, diagonal jog back recovery, 2nd 150m sprint. Then diagonal walk back recovery and repeat. So that would be the first unit of 4x150m.
Then take a lap walk or take up to 10 mins rest, whatever you need to recover. But the idea really is to try to get three units of this work, so that is 12 x 150m in total for the session.
If you start by running 18sec, you may realise life is getting a bit difficult by the third set. So I would just say you should be conservative the first time you do this session and just aim to complete the three sets. Then when the session comes around again (or a version derived from this session) you can put your foot down and really challenge yourself against the clock.
You should never feel “bad”. If you throw-up after a session it will usually be because you have performed the work at a level for which you have over-reached your current fitness readiness. It usually means you are not sufficiently adapted yet to have trained at such a high level.
Charlie says “if you think you can do one more rep, you have already done one rep too many”. I agree with that. No “dead heroes” for me please.
But having said all that, you train with an objective in mind, with a time-line and also on this program there is plenty of recovery time between sets and within the basic seven-day training structure (2-on, 1-off, 3-on, 1-off days of training v rest) as well as the last week of the 6-week GPP cycle being a “rest and test” week (which is pretty light in terms of physical demands).
So you can attack the sessions as you feel capable, but the twin priorities are to accomplish the recommended volume and achieve the recommended intensity over the period of the GPP cycle.
Yes. Run the ladder at a speed you think you can handle so as to finish the session. Safety is the most important thing. You will start to regain your legs as the reps become shorter, but don’t be tempted to run a personal best or anything crazy-fast. It’s more about having the strength to build a quick rhythm that you can manage. There are some other reasons for adding the shorter reps following the longer “depletion” reps, but the reasoning behind that is already written about earlier in this thread.
Do you mean what is the intensity of the opening Long Rep and the back-up rep? The stress on the “couplets” (two-rep set) tends to change according to your fitness readiness, the wind condition and your objective for the day. In GPP I usually like to see a solid first rep. So for example with the 300+150 (off 30sec rec) my top guy might start GPP on grass in spiked shoes with 36sec in a rhythm which is strong but relaxed. Then he would “smash” the backup 150m as fast as he can safely manage. But this guy had a 300m PB of 31.8 FAT. Later when he is fitter, we would take elements of this session to the synthetic track and try to run the 300m at 400m race pace (32.2 to 32.5 pace) and then build into the backup 150 so that he might run fast in the middle 50m section and then maintain relaxed rhythm over the last 50m and his time would not matter but it might still be pretty quick (17sec or faster, which is quick backing up from a 32sec 300m after a 30sec rest and then a walk-up start to the 150m)
Not really sure what you mean here again. But in general, I prefer the shorter reps on the track to simulate the rhythm of the race in your PB target 400m. So, if you want to run 44.0 for 400m, sooner or later you have to start to put together elements of such a race in your training. You can work at this objective from both ends of the competition distance, going short to long on your intensity days, or from long to short on any of your days. In general though, if you want to run 44.0 for 400m you know the race model will be something like 23sec for the last 200m, 12sec or under for the last 100m. The rhythm of your training will determine to a large degree the biomechanics of your training and therefore your racing. So you can do a lot of your training with 400m race specificity without actually running faster than 23sec for 200m. But of course at some point you will need to run a flying 300m backup rep in 34sec (first 100m of a 44.0 400m in about 11sec, last 300m therefore in around 34).
And obviously it is the nature of our biology that we still benefit greatly in the 400m from being able to split the 200m in a time which is relatively comfortable. So Michael Johnson splits his 400m in 21 but he has a 200m PB of 19.32. So while we can be tough and endure 300+150 and 6x200 in sub 23, ultimately we cannot run a really fast 400m without being really fast over 200m which means being pretty fast at 150m, 100m, 60m etc. Therefore at some stage every program must attend to the priority of Speed Development. It’s how you put it all together that will decide whether the jigsaw puzzle produces medals or mediocrity.
kitkat: thanks for the great information. you are like an assistant coach on our team and the kids have great confidence in your training program. i have a quick question for you … if an 18 year old female sprinter that has followed a S-L (little intensive tempo) program throughout high school would she benefit from more of a 400m program this (her final) season. this girl is a 12.93/27.43 short sprinter with great strength (200 squat and 100 clean). i am considering training her in the 400m program this Spring in an attempt to work on the other side (endurance) of the equation.
I am no kitkat, but I will say from years of coaching and observing in my state that 12.93 is a much better time than 27.43. On my team we have a few girls who can do 27.1 - 27.4, but no one under 13.0. So it seems to me that your girl is either genetically more suited to 100 or she would benefit from endurance work. Is your goal to improve her 200 time or to actually race her at 400?
i agree that her 200m time is not up to par. she does not participate in any other sport (no soccer or basketball to provide IT type conditioning) so fitness is probably a limiting factor. she does work out in the weight room in the winter but we cannot address IT very well in the hallway without risking injury. my goal is to improve her 100/200m time … i don’t think she has the stomach for the 400m. genetically? she is 5’6" and 120 lbs. she should be able to run the 200m faster.
She’s more than strong enough in the gym to do anything on the track. Seems like she should ration her energy a bit better, not so much bias toward the gym. But I suppose that depends on her goals. Does she want to be a successful sprinter? If yes, then she needs to expend the majority of her energy running the sprints. The weights are a supplement, not a substitute for track training.
It’s so hard to be prescritpive without seeing the athlete move. Maybe it’s a biomechanics issue. Maybe she’s too tight around the hips to keep it going over 200m, but I agree her 100m is much better than her 200m.
Maybe just try to design something for her that encourages her to relax in the longer reps. Perhaps some splits runs may suit, give her plenty of recovery time early. She sounds like a pure power creature… wish I could offer more.
thanks for the advice. we are stuck in a hallway until April so we will have to be creative for now. do you have some split run ideas for a hallway that is 50m long? we tried downbacks on friday w/ 2’ b/w reps at 80-85% effort … with a focus on relaxation and good posture.
I am wondering if something like this might help:
Take a goal 200 time, probably betw 26.8 and 27.0. Then figure out the times that she would cross 120, 140, 160 and 180 if she were running that 200 goal time. Then start her with 2X120 with slightly incomplete rest (or 2X2X120 if she can handle it). When she succeeds, move up to 140 and so on. So basically she is extending her 200 pace for longer and longer runs. This would be done once per week, thus not increasing the distance more than once per week. Just an idea.
Sounds like the way to go. How many downbacks to the set? Anyway, you can build the reps up to say, 4, and then build up some sets. Pretty restrictive. Maybe mix in some skips and some sort of sled (maybe with some carpet taped around the sled so not to damage the corridor floor?
The idea is pleasing, the implementation not always so. It will work well enough though if you make allowances within your system for natural variations (fatigue, wind, surface, slight illness etc) but you know that. I suppose I’m just saying don’t let the athlete become a slave to the program. There will be fluctuations from the ideal.
the specific down-back workout was … down and back + 7 Push-Ups + down and back rest 2’ (3 reps in a set and 2 sets w/ 5’ b/w sets). i cued her to “stay relaxed” and she looked pretty smooth and efficient throughout the workout at an 80-85% intensity. do you think this workout is a good lead-in to the 6x200m session? she probably will not be a 4x4 runner for us but it just seems that she would benefit from 400m concurrent training principals.
Hmmm, I think she may still struggle with the 200s set. But perhaps if you break up the 200s and maybe go for 1 x 3 x200 and then 2 x 200 and gradually reconstruct the session until you get to the 5x200…
I’m definitely not a track guy, but I have done a lot of work with short-to-long and relative times and that sort of thing in my own sport. For what it’s worth (and it may be worth absolutely nothing), here are some of my thoughts:
Anytime the time for a longer distance is exceptionally high compared to the time for a shorter distance, one of two things (or both) could be happening:
There is an endurance problem even at the shorter distance, and it is more obvious, and more significant, at the longer distance, but it is not solely because of the longer distance.
The athlete is pacing herself far more than appropriate at the longer distance, and even the short-distance split for the longer distance is far off of the time for the short distance (for example, the first 100m of the 200m is far off of her regular 100m time). The extra energy at the end never makes up for the time she gave away at the beginning. If she looks better at the end of the longer distance than she does at the end of the shorter distance, the problem is not physical. If this happens, we work on pushing the first part far more, and then hanging on. Once she sees that her times are better that way, we can now work on the physical problem (if it even exists).
Having unlimited facilities, and time, for that matter, is nice, but it’s easy to get sloppy. Having one, or both, of those things restricted, while extremely frustrating and annoying, can eventually lead to some good things. We used to row on rivers with unlimited distance, and in 1997 we switched to a location that was about a mile long. So we started going short to long, not because it was part of any great philosophy we had, but because it was pretty much all we could figure out to do. It worked great. In 2000, we went back to an unlimited stretch of river, but we never went back to long to short, because the short to long was working so well. Some teams that row on lakes go back and forth all the time, or in circles, but that never seemed to me to really work, at least for us. (We had to go back and forth, too, obviously, but the turn was always a part of a rest period. We never did a work piece longer than the stretch of river we had.)
Maybe you could use the 50m hallway to work solely on top-end speed (technique being a part of that, of course), and make her the best 50m (or 40m or 30m, depending on whatever is safe) runner possible, and not use the hallway for speed endurance or longer distances and that sort of thing. Maybe you could use stairs (if you have them and if there is a safe way to do it), or something similar, to do continuous all-out work for 27 or 28 seconds or whatever you think she needs. Then start running longer sprints distances when you get outside. It’s not ideal, and it wouldn’t be anyone’s first or maybe even second or third choice, but you gotta do what you gotta do. At least that way, when you got outside, you’d have an athlete with great top-end speed who is used to going all-out for 27 or 28 seconds.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts. If they help, great. If they don’t, sorry for making it so long to read.
MSO: much appreciated rowing analogy. i feel like i am in the same boat (pardon the pun) with limited space but maybe a little creativity can fill the void. what about a downback that includes a flight of stairs at the end of the run to get us closer to 27 seconds? the rest time of turning around should improve the quality of the run and the stairs at the end should be a good way to finish with good Max V running mechanics.
[/