Charlie,
In your discussions of short to long plans, you typically show progressions starting with something like 4x[4x60] with increasing accelerations distances (i.e. 20+40 -> 30+30 ->40+20, etc.) and decreasing total reps. This begins as serialized split runs and progresses toward pure speed work (i.e. 3-4x60).
In the same example, you alternate the 60m serialized workouts with in/out workouts which also progress toward pure speed workouts (i.e. 3-4x60m).
Have you ever used longer split runs (e.g., 100+100+100) in this setup? For example:
Mon. in/outs
Tues. Tempo
Wed. 2-3x(100+100+100)
Thurs. Tempo
Fri. 4x[4x60] accel+maintain
Sat. Tempo
As the Mon. and Fri. workouts progress to pure speed workouts they are still separated by the split run SE day.
The rest to distance relationship changes when the distance gets greater. IE a 2.5min break between 60s doesn’t equate to the same break between 100s (or 120s to make my point) even if the set distance is the same (4 x 60 vs 2 x 120)
That said, the schedule you show does work if you are in a warm climate and may reduce the CNS stress for those who need less.
I’d limit the 100+100+100s to two sets and keep the breaks at 90sec while gradually spreading the 60 breaks as in my examples to keep the contrast between the two sessions greater.- short, long, medium setup.
As an alternative, would you consider using just the shorter serialized runs for special endurance during the first part of the SPP and then incorporate longer split runs later in the SPP as the in/out and accel+maintain workouts converge?
For example, starting with:
Mon. 4x[4x60] accel 20+maintain 40
Tues. Tempo
Wed. 2x[3x(20+20+20)] in/out
Thurs. Tempo
Fri. 4x[4x60] accel 20+maintain 40
Sat. Tempo
and progressing (about half way through) to:
Mon. 2x[3x60] accel 40+maintain 20
Tues. Tempo
Wed. 2x(100+100+100)
Thur. Tempo
Fri. 4x(20 finish drill), 4x60
and then progress the short speed workouts from there.
If the athlete is more a 200/100 instead of a 60/100 or 100/200 type who is only going to be training two high intensity days instead of three, is the split 100+100+100 (90 secs rec) a better option than the 60’s for SE as outlined in the Vancouver short-to-long programme? That is for e.g.:
Mon: Ins and Outs
Tue: Tempo
Wed: Tempo
Thu: 2x 100+100+100 (90secs rec)/15 mins rec instead of 2x4x60 (2.5mins rec/7 mins)
Fri:Tempo
Sat:Rest
Sun:Rest
The split 300’s SE (100+100+100) would eventually become full 300’s (150+150; 200+100; etc) and then work itself down from 2x300 to 2x250, 2x200, etc, whilst the speed moves from ins and outs to full 60’s and eventually 80’s, 100, 120’s, etc during the course of the full training year (ends-to-middle)?
Is this a better option, or should I still stay with the format of SPP1 (acceleration), SPP2 (Maxvelocity), and SPP3 (speed endurance) rather than the ends to middle example for the 200/100 type who cannot take too much CNS stress?
With split runs and special endurance, I have an athlete who can only do about 210m of which one can be 120 - 150 and a shorter one of 60 - 90, due to a back issue.
Would it be better to stick that sort of rep as 2 separate runs or if he can manage it do say 2 x 60 + 60 +60?
It is a nerve issue, that affects his adductor/groin and calves. Gets a burning feel in adductor and calves cramp/spasm.
It seems to be volume based and not intensity based. He can’t do a high volume of tempo - 20 x 100 he can do but recovery isn’t great (even at 60% pace)
His surgeon and sports medicine doctor advised him to give up sport and his job as an industrial/commerical electrician.
Sounds like the first step is to move the tempo to the pool as that would remove alot of stress from the back and then see what remains to be done to relieve the isue.
The sports doctor is pretty awesome for athletes, I had three doctors tell me I would never throw hammers again, yet he told me I could and helped get me back. He is pretty good.
There were days when the athletes’ session was literally turn up to training and we would walk for 2 minutes and that was it.