TrevorS, EFE stands for easy-fast-easy and the reverse for FEF.
John, that’s what I meant regarding working from both ends. The latter point on developing maximum speed as much as possible is also true and especially for women. As Charlie says in his book “The key to the longer sprints (200-400 m) is the speed reserve, especially in races such as the women’s 400 m. There are few women, who are good in the 400 m at the world level and not also good in the 100-m sprint.” In gofast’s model though -which I am sure has been quite successful- attention should be paid on the 4-day weeks’ schedule (e.g., working on a 2+1-week plan). Perhaps he could comment on that and how it may fluctuate per phase.
Thanks Nikoluski. Now how does that work exactly? I see ESTI says tires then EFE. I want to do the Canadian Indoor and outdoor season this year so just finishing up my GPP phase and while the weather is still hot have added sled sprints over 30m this week.
I tried to follow the same Endurance vs. Power format as KK, while incorporating Accels/speed from day one. I shortened the distances in the first couple of weeks due to focusing on the 100m and not having done much Speed Endurance work. During the second GPP cycle, I will probably increase the distances covered in the GPP. What are your thoughts?
In the Lance Brauman interview a few years ago, his group at the time was doing a lot of split runs similar to KK’s. They also did 40 sec+20 seconds (similar to 300+150). Tyson Gay has repeated a few times on Twitter he likes 300+100 as a workout.
Climb, I’d be cautious in your week 2 and 3. Give it a shot and report back your results.
The 5x200 session is going to kick your ass, and doing it the day after speed may not be feasible, especially if you expect to do more speed type work the day after 5x200. Try it and let us know how you feel though.
As for lengthening the runs in the second GPP block, I’d go the other way around and start with longer runs for general fitness and conditioning, getting more specific (and shorter) as you get closer to the race block.
Wow, that is a serious workload. Maybe I’m misunderstanding the intention of the specifics of this GPP program and its intent, but how do you get yourself into condition to run 2-4x4x150m or 5x200 at 95% capacity or higher? Or is this specific GPP assuming a certain level of fitness upon arrival?
I agree that what I have posted may not work out and I plan to change things as needed. I plan to keep the volume very low for the speed day and will not be running all out on the 5x200. I may insert a rest day on day 5 and complete the 5x200m on day 6. I will see how I feel and how things are going and make that determination then. Also, I expect that I will only complete 2-3x500m before I am toast initially.
I was planning on a slight increase in distance during the second block due to being in better shape at that time. I am only planning on increasing some of the workouts to 250-300m for the longer distance for some of the split runs. That depends on how week 3 goes with the longer distances that week. I don’t think increasing the distances will be much of an issue for racing as I do not have any races any where near the end of the GPP.
Thanks for the critique and I will keep everyone posted on how things go.
Those workouts are not 95%+. KK’s program might be called intensive tempo by Charlie’s standards. To understand 5x200, lets look at a 50 sec runner. To run 50 seconds, they will need to run about 22.7 in the 200. To complete 5x200 for a 50 second pace, you would run the 200s in 26 seconds, 87% of approximate max speed.
The split runs put you in a state of fatigue to develop lactate tolerance. The transition phase is more full out or close to it for the distances on certain days.
Okay that makes far more sense. I’d just been reading through some of the eBook bundle so of course I had those percentages stuck in my head and they weren’t quite lining up with the work listed here. Thanks for the clarification, that’s still a truckload of work, but I can see how someone might be able to get through it now.
The KitKat approach has some very nice positives. First, the loading / unloading schemes are simpler, thus harder to screw up.
It can be very useful for the masters athlete or someone with a low work capacity. The CF program is very nervous system intensive, and the KitKat program is mentally tough but a little easier on the nervous system at first, but builds a good deal of work capacity quickly. Thus, you will likely be much better able to handle CF style speeds sessions after one or two blocks of a 6 week GPP. ESTI can weigh in here too, but what I learned from him is that it “built a big battery” for his high school kids, and allowed them to tolerate short to long type speed sessions after a GPP.
Remember Charlie’s Short to Long 100m program was for advanced athletes with a massive training base. Many will need a bridge to get there.
That`s a really good idea. I was not sure about mixing sessions across both programmes, but using KK as a transition to CF sounds smart to me. As a masters athlete myself I have exactly the problems you mention.
I would also add that for a developing athlete, short to long has its positives. However, one of the negatives is limited repetitions. I found in the 6 wk GPP my runners learned to “relax” when running, where I found them constantly tight doing s-l work prior. After the GPP, I think a good part of the success I had was their ability to run relaxed.
Also, I recall a conversation with Charlie and his point was along the lines of what we did in the end was a product of what came before. Remember, there were many years Charlie’s athletes did Long to short style training. Those longer runs do teach relaxation and build capacity in their own way, as does KK GPP.
Would Ben have done as well on S to L without those years of longer work? I don’t know the answer. Is doing long ot short and then going to short to long over several years the way to go? I don’t know either. But it is worth investigating…