If you were to throw all the sub-9.8 guys (meaning Ben, Mo, Powell, Gay, and Bolt) into a multiple correlation analysis, you’d probably come to the conclusion that there’s no correlation at all for weights.
Mike Young has made the point that while increasing weight numbers initially improve sprint performance, beyond a certain point, continued emphasis on increasing weight numbers has a negative effect on sprint performance, since increasing the weights gradually takes CNS resources away from track. So, one seems to need weight numbers that are “good enough,” but not more than that.
If Ben Johnson couldn’t squat anywhere near 600lbs, Would he be slower?. I reckon so. But don’t forget all the other defining & differing qualities of strength needed at all phases of a race to be successful.
People seem to be talking like Usain is weak. At the core?. The achilles tendons?. Hip flexors?.
lol.
A guy that produces that much power?. Take a walk.
You guys need to take extra looks at the EMG analysis for the squat in terms of glute, core, achilles, hip flexor activity. OVERRATED. Period. I’ve seen the data.
Although it’s intriguing to review and discuss the weight programs for the best of the best I feel you have to be carefull of what you take away from it. If you’re fortunate to be coaching a sub 10.1 or 10.0 athlete then maybe there’s a lot to be derived from this material. But I would believe there are very few of those coaches here (no disrespect intended).
I worry when these VERY special athletes who’s body’s are rich with FT muscles and very efficient circuitry become the model or point of reference for how strength training program should be constructed…BJ, Carl, Burrell, MO, TM, AP, UB, DC, TG, all giants of the sport but SO incredibly different. So what we’re seeing here is more of the same…another way of doing things.
Some get so caught up with the numbers and MxS etc., and then try to compare one athlete to another as if to come to a definition as to how one should lift. We’re only seeing a piece of the puzzle. I would love for someone to post the training programs that these athletes do to develop leg stiffness and elastic qualities! This is where I would like to see more time devoted and more discussion.
Now just a thought as it relates to training (this may seem silly on the surface)…How about we JUST look at training as high intensity (sprint, jump, throw, lift) or low intensity and nothing more? It’s my belief that this would impact how we view and utilize individual components and focus more on the outcome and far less on the individual components. Now you’re just doing whatever you need and whenever you need to do it in training to be the best. So now who cares if you lift or not or throw or not or jump or not…I hope that makes sense :o …Thoughts?
Oh and real quick…Mr. Lemaitre looks like he barely finished puberty as his singlet looks to be barely stay on his body. Wonder what he’s doing for weight training.
Those who think otherwise would be well served to re-review Charlie’s work.
Weights follow speed and thus focusing any substantial time on looking into what the fastest of the fast do for weight training is synonymous with scrutinizing the cart instead of the horse.
My only interest in the weight aspect of the elite sprinter population is one of curiosity as I enjoy seeing all aspects of the sprinters preparation; however, I learned some time ago that this aspect of the preparation is the afterthought in relation to the speed work because it is the speed work that serves a more influential role towards the weights and not the other way around.
Charlie more than expounded upon this on numerous occasions.
I see this over and over again with my skill players. Looking at the weight program alone, in our case, one couldn’t possibly make sense of where some of the numbers come from (Dion Lewis squatted 535 the other day and hasn’t worked out with more than 365 in 4-6 weeks).
One must see the entire program before any reasonable conclusions are drawn.
Weights follow speed. Thanks Charlie.
I’m with you Randy, it’s the track work first and everything else second that I’m interested in seeing.
The more coaches I speak with, I’m starting to not buy into this submax shit. If you want to develop the raw strength that most D1 football coaches want, you must lift heavy loads in the 1-5 zone. Yes, submax loads may develop enough strength to perform the sport task, but that’s not what D1 football coaches want - at least 99.999%…
What’s the secret to lower leg stiffness, stop your kids from playing playstation3 and get back to old school games (tag, jumping from monkey bars, jump rope, hopscotch etc)…
Thanks for the kind words James…Your post makes me think. Looking at workouts posted earlier in the thread (I too have them on my CPU :D) and the loads lifted and your athlete’s PR having only trained with 365 only shows how everything may and/or can help everything else. Xman lifted relatively light weights in training but I’m certain he could probably squat a large amount if that’s all he had to do. Think about how much horse power he was putting out in training to run 19.6 at the time, or how much he was putting into those explosive medball/shot throws. So remember one leg extension exercise may and/or develop another (work all along the curve…hmmmm where have we heard that before).
So again don’t get hung up on the numbers. If I had the capacity to run sub 9.9 or faster I may never step in a weight to develop MxS or power as I’m doing much more of that on the track :D… Thanks CF for the wisdom
Coach Shaver does a lot of other high intensity activities during the training year so that may be the reason for the lighter loads (spreading the work around). Also, LSU gets the best of the best high school athletes so there may be less of a need to develop the qualities that weight lifting may offer.
To each his own. I, however, strongly disagree with the idea that the bulk, or any appreciable volume, of the primary general strength work must be in the heavier ranges.
In my own experience as a weight training enthusiast, dating back to 87-88, coupled with my coaching experience, there’s absolutely no question that sub-max weights are the way to go regarding the bulk of the weight training volume. Regarding what most D1 coaches may or may not think…you know where I stand on that topic.
Squatting 400-500lbs is probably good enough. Easy to attain, but nothing crazy, no powerlifting numbers. Charlie was great at enumerating the benefits of strength training, in the muscle fibers and CNS.
Diminishing returns in strength forces the issue of increasing the stressor to a point which competes neurally with sprinting. At which point it loses its effectiveness because you lose the ability to handle speed. Unless speed is maintained and speed/strength blocks are alternated.
If the fibers that are directly involved with sprinting are strengthened doesnt this make you faster? An athlete with an efficient nervous system recruits X % of fibers. His output is larger, therefore CNS demands are higher than an athlete with lower CNS efficiency. Doesnt this mean that this athlete will gain greater speed through strength training but at the same time strength training will interfere more with the demands of speed? I believe this is the basis for which general strengthening methods are favored over specific.
As for the issue of maximal weights lifted, how many athletes really test their 1RM. I know that up until the point where I had to test my 1RM front squat I would have said my max was 335lbs. But its more in the 400lbs range. Some athletes might be working in ranges but the ceiling on their maxes are much higher then expected.
RB34, I should also point out the fact that the majoriity of D1 coaches do not conduct true alactic speed work; thus it may make for a better case on their behalf to lift heavier weights because their players are not getting the stimulus from the speed work that ours do, along with any other program that actually performs speed work.
You might be surprised to know that most ‘think’ that 300yd shuttles and various types of ‘gassers’ are speed work.
Buddy and I had a fellow come visit us for a few days who has visited 26 major D1 programs (SEC, Big 12, Big 10, etcetera) in the last four months just to talk shop with the coaches.
Amidst his detailed report and comparison, he noted that we were the only program that conducted true speed work.
I can’t speak to the totality of programs; regarding the majority that do not conduct speed work- there are many players who actually become slower.
Exceptions are players who also run track or who are fortunate enough to possess enough favorable genetic material to experience some improved speed as a result of, if nothing else, biological maturation.
I know someone who was on the coaching staff of a team that won the national championship in recent years and he said most players deteriorated in their physical preparation with each year due to the erroneous, heavily lactic, and overvolumized training program
Fortunate for those high level programs is that they’re deep enough with talent to overcome such coaching errors.
how much faster (improving top speed and acceleration) could one expect to get without any weightlifting? To me this would mean: how much faster can one get without the use of a weightroom to strengthen the legs?
Just focusing on track work with sprints of different (short) distances. You could improve endurance and technique, but would your acceleration or top speed improve? What can be done to increase top speed without the use of weights.
Lets say the athlete is a football player, so specific technique is not essential (ie: block starts etc.)
Is it possible to get faster without squatting, deadlift, core lifts, --any strength training–
Like i said, im not talking endurance, im not talking 100m dash time. Im talking pure raw speed increases. Technique aside.
You would run sprints or the like about 5 days per week. And thats it. Thoughts?
Wonder what he’s doing for weight training. 