Here’s a question I previously answered at EFS that illustrates my take on the matter regarding the significance of the stimulus and overload needed other than the competition exercise itself:
Question:
Maximum ground force application time could be as short as 0.04s, beginning at toe down and ending prior to mid stance. A slow sprinter might take double the time, but that still is around a 10th of a second.
This is exactly why we don’t do “explosive” lifts…they’re too slow. In fact, all lifts are too slow, so concentration on maximizing strength and letting the system take care of the isometric delivery rate seems to be the only rational way to go, at least from the strength side.
I can understand why we do Plyometric drills with the above statements. Why would anyone use dynamic effort strength training if they do not increase the speed in which mass specific force is translated in sprinting? It seems like a waste of time. What do you think?
My Response(edited):
If we consider sprinting we know that no other special exercise includes ground contact times as brief. In order to further the sprint/speed potential the neuromuscular apparatus must be overloaded, however.
Herein lies all of the debate.
For one this may include a predominance of sprinting and jumping/bounding exercise (RE Carl Lewis who performed very little weight training throughout his career). In this case, the generally specific jumping/bounding provides a neuromuscular overload that the sprint itself does not and thus serves as an effective mechanism to support speed improvement.
For another this may include a predominance of sprinting and weight training (RE Ben Johnson who performed very little jump training nor Olympic lifting but had an enormous squat). In this case, the squat exercise, while less specific than jumps and bounds, but meaningful for the sprinter due to the strengthening of the active musculature, provides a neuromuscular overload that the sprint itself does not and thus serves as an effective mechanism to support speed improvement.
The reality is that the peculiarities specific to each individual’s physiology dictates that a unique set of circumstances is required in order for THAT individual to attain sport mastery.
The only absolute is that any sportsman must practice their discipline in order to perfect its performance. Beyond that, we know that the practice of the discipline alone is not sufficient in order to further performance to the stage of high mastery.
That which is required, separate from the practice of the discipline itself, varies from individual to individual due to biological variability.
While the continuum of specificity exists in absolute terms once we identify a target of training, we must also acknowledge that the stimuli needed to further the results of less than high qualified athletes is wildly flexible.
The majority of western athletes are less than highly qualified in strength preparation due to the lack of a sound long term physical preparation model in this country. As a result, many coaches, regardless of qualification, are successfully assisting athletes in heightening their sport performance via wildly varying methods of training and its execution.
This is why one school may preach heavy lifting, another may preach the dynamic effort lifting of barbells via squatting, another may preach Olympic lifting, another may preach plyometric jump training, and any possible combination of the above, all as adjuncts to sprint work in order to improve speed.
Due to what I’ve previously explained we know that ALL OF IT WILL WORK…
FOR A FINITE AMOUNT OF TIME
So while I, speaking only for myself, may present a sound case or criticism of another’s work, I cannot deny that individual of the success that they’ve had with their athletes.
What I can do is explain the WHY and trust that I’ve inspired someone to closely scrutinize their efforts in favor of their athletes’ long term HEALTHY development and attainment of sport mastery.