It’s both aerobic and anaerobic, I think it has merit and will provide a conditioning benifit. Only you will know whether the rest periods meet the correct level of your athletes. It is understood that any athlete with a greater aerobic capacity will be able to perform repeats at a higher quality in a specific time. This will also carry over to practice performance regardless of the sport. Even though a sport is not aerobic in nature, (fencing, American football) performance in practice at this higher quality will hopefully translate to improved play in competition.
I agree too.
Generally start with 3’s
They can usually complete them quite well and in good time.
Though it does depend on the athlete.
With some you can do 4’s in the first few 2 sessions
But I’d usually stick with 3’s and use density to manipulate stress
IMO, shuttles are way overrated. To high intensity to quickly recover from as an aerobic training stimulus and too low an intensity to provide any benefit for speed development. Falls right smack dab in the middle. Whats the benefit here, especially for soccer players? Why do lactate work for soccer? Also, are the shuttles at 25 or 50 yards? Why make 6 or 12 cuts during a conditioning drill? What is the desired training effect from shuttles?
Stick to high/low…your players will be much better off. I have seen way to many coaches run their players into the ground with shuttles. Don’t know why these 300’s and 150’s became so popular.
would this type of session be high or low cns… ie should it be done between sprint days or have its own day followed by tempos?
After a sprint day…or after some aglity drills, same day, then more tempo, rest or sprints. The stress on the athlete will be determined by the lactate produced and the HR during the session. Current conditioning levels and regeneration practices by the athlete will dictate what the next sessions intensity may be. Also, what meso cycle are you in and when is the next game…Is the rest/recovery manipulating the tempo, or is the expected time to complete each 300 the factor of tempo. If the later then each athlete needs a different projected time based on present %max. So, then your first session of 300 repeats could be a test to determine levels of conditioning and tolerance of work.
Omyss,
please, search the forum on Soccer and Speed Endurance!!
Good speed work -with emphasis on acceleration- and tempo work on a 20/80% ratio is adequate! No 300s, no 200s, no Speed Endurance!
Save your energy and efforts for some other work, which is needed indeed!
Hope it helps!
Thanks Nikoluski…i guess no one saw my post on this saying the same thing.
Omyss-
Your question hits on the problem with shuttle sessions. For an aerobic training element (which they are actually more special end. work), they are way to high an intensity and drain the CNS too much to recovery quickly from to be ready for the next high intensity session. On the flip side, they are too low an intensity to provide an adequate stimulus for speed development. If fact, shuttles will only take away from the qualities you are trying to train. That is why they do not fit well within a plan and don’t have any use for soccer. Do not confuse aerobic training with having to suck wind after a drill. Its all about the quality. Sorry shuttle fans.
ok ok, i guess i should listen to you guys since so many ppl have said that this type of training is bad for soccer… but its just soo hard for me to accept that soccer training should not involve sessions where you really push the limits of the cardio system… you know those sessions where you really challenge yourself to keep going hard even though you want to stop… kinda of like in a tough soccer game…
Yeah… I’ve been there before. It took me a while to slap some sense into myself but I finally did it. Tempo work can be fairly challenging but it’s alot easier and more beneficial than running til you drop.
What really confuses me is how soccer players (who are endurance atheletes) are supposed to increase their endurance without pushing their heartrates during tough sessions (like the one listed above)… Its like a spirinter trying to increase speed without training at maximal velocity, or pwerlifter trying to get stronger by lifting only at 70%of a 1rm…
Since when are soccer players endurance athletes? Did you ever follow a soccer player during a game so see what they actually do? Jog, walk, jog, short sprint, jump, jog, stand, short sprint, kick, walk, etc. Low intensity activity seperated with short sprints. Watch the player not the game.
ok well maybe their not totally endurance atheletes, and should be classified as all around athletes… But there is no doubt that endurace is a key part of the game… if you’ve ever played soccer, you’d know how cardiovascularly demanding soccer can be especially if your playing midfield in the latter stages of a game… and i still don’t see how they can imporve this aspect of the game without really pushing the cardiosystem, just as you push max velocity during speed training…
But since the knowlageable ppl on this board have claimed that those type of training sessions are bad for soccer players, i will just have to take their word for it…
Are you Kidding? That’s not a decription of how my team plays soccer. In fact, if our players, didn’t have a tremendous aerobic base, and an ability to tolerate lactate, they would not be able to finish a practice. I’m not the team coach, but I’ve prepared some of the players in the off-season and pre-season. Science may say one thing, and others on this site may agree with it, sometimes I too, other times I must use what feels right and has worked brfore. I also look forward to trying new training programs and taking new ideas from others that have also achieved success with what I am now reading on this site. I’ve used shuttles and they have worked. Can you imagine that…
5-10-5, 10-10-10-10, 150, 300, t-drill, and more call 'em agility/conditioning acceleration/decereraltion drills… call 'em crazy and call 'em stupid, but yes, they all play a role in athletic and sports performance. theyWe don’t run 'em everyday. And certainly, not for any track athletes, they don’t need to stop and change direction, they can just run into those mats at the end of the track. Also, I don’t have access to a track, sometimes only half a field, or a gym when it’s 30 degrees and I bet I’m not the only one in this situation. Then again, I could just have the players jog, walk, jog, and stand around… like a soccer game.
Just kick it.
.
Can someone post a research article of the analysis of a soccer game to help us here.
I think Nike did one some time ago.
The sprint component is quite low, but there is a relatively high 75% striding element too don’t forget.
It’s not all walk-sprint.
No23, the Nike Review found:
Walking 26%
Jogging 49%
Cruising 17%
Sprinting 8%
With Ball 2%
Its worth noting that its during the 10% spent sprinting and with the ball that the game is generally won. Thus, looking at all the training together, these qualities should be prioritised to a greater extent.
Other studies on the subject that show inter-positional variations:
J Sci Med Sport. 2004 Sep;7(3):278-91. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15518293&query_hl=3
Player movement patterns and game activities in the Australian Football League.
Dawson B, Hopkinson R, Appleby B, Stewart G, Roberts C.
School of Human Movement and Exercise Science, The University of Western Australia.
In the Australian Football League (AFL), specific game movements and activities have not been studied since the 1970s and 1980s and the game is now much faster than it was 20-30 years ago. Using lapsed-time video analysis, AFL players from five different positions (full forward/full back, centre half forward/centre half back, small forward/small back, mid fielders and ruckmen) had their movement patterns (stand, walk, jog, fast-run, sprint, change of direction) and game activities (possessions, ruck duels, ground ball contests, shepherds, spoils, bumps and tackles) recorded in two games each in the 2000 season. A descriptive analysis of the results was undertaken. The main findings were: full forward/full back were most different from the other positions, as they were seen to stand more and jog and fast-run less: ruckmen and midfielders were involved in more game activities than the other positions; for all positions, there were more than 150 high intensity movements (fast-run plus sprint) in the game, but these accounted for only 4-6% of total movement time: virtually all of the high intensity movements lasted for <6 secs; more than half of all sprints involved at least one change of direction, mostly within the 0-90 degrees arc (left or right) and all ground ball contests took <6 secs, with midfielders having 2-3 times as many as the other positions. Improvements in specific pre-season and in-season training practices for different positions should be possible after careful interpretation of these findings.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2000 Jun;40(2):162-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11034438&query_hl=7
Investigation of anthropometric and work-rate profiles of elite South American international soccer players.
Rienzi E, Drust B, Reilly T, Carter JE, Martin A.
Unisport, Centro de Evaluacion y Orientacion, Fisica-Deportiva, Montevideo, Uruguay.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the current investigation was to determine the movement profiles of elite South American soccer players during international competition and examine the relationship between anthropometric profile and work-rate variables. METHODS: Seventeen full-time professional soccer players were filmed while competing for their countries. Anthropometric profiles were obtained for eleven of these players. Six full-time professional players from the English Premier League were also filmed for comparative purposes. RESULTS: The South American international players covered significantly less (p<0.05) total distance during match-play than English Premier League players (International, 8638+/-1158 m; English Premier League, 10104+/-703 m). The total distance covered during the second half of the game was significantly reduced (p<0.05) compared to the first half distance for both groups of players (mean+/-SD first half 4605+/-625 m; mean+/-SD second half 4415+/-634 m). The data for both groups of players were combined to evaluate positional differences in the workrate profile. Midfield players covered a significantly greater (p<0.05) distance than forward players (midfield, 9826+/-1031 m; forwards, 7736+/-929 m) and defenders covered a greater (p<0.05) distance jogging backwards than forward players (defenders, 276+/-155 m; forwards, 68+/-25 m). Forwards sprinted a greater distance (p<0.05) than defensive players (defenders, 231+/-142 m; forwards, 557+/-142 m). Mean somatotype was a balanced mesomorph (2-5 1/2-2). Body mass and muscle mass was related to the total distance covered (r=0.43, r=0.53, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on these data, it seems that an individual’s work-rate profile is dependent upon the type of competition and the playing position. Relationships between anthropometric profile and work-rate are complex due to the interaction between the variables that determine work-rate.
I think this right here says a lot. It sounds as if your practices are pretty brutal. Well, are they practices, or conditioning sessions? Quality over quantity.
Have you tried training them on a high/low (95/75) scheme? How do you know this does not work better than your special endurance sessions if you ahve not tried it? You say you look foreward to trying new programs and ideas, but you criticize what i am suggesting. Hopefully you did not take my example of what happens in soccer as literal. But at the Nike study presented below shows, it’s not that far off. You can stick with the masses and keep our youth soccer players as one of the most overtrained and underrested groups out there.
Again, shuttles=overrated.
Also, why try to include in your “conditioning” what practice itself will take care of? Specifically, cutting? I’m not saying change of direction is not an important part of the game, but i have seen enough soccer players suffer from ankle, shin, knee problems from doing short distance cutting drills as part of conditioning all off-season.
Finally, as for your lack of facilities…you are preaching to the choir my friend. Most of the people on here have inadequate facilities, its part of coaching, but that doesn’t mean inadecuate training should be the result.
Succes in soccer among technical/tactical skills, depend on speed-agility abilities, but again, you must be fast over the 90min (or more) of a game! Or in other words, you must be able to recover fast between short burts - this is strongly corelated with aerobic capacity!
But developing this aerobic ability doesnt mean doing >20-30min runs… It is best developed with some interval/tempo method!
I am for HI/LI approach in soccer training!
About shuttles… What are they and what is the intesity of them? Do you mean doing 5x20m or something? I use them in training with basketball players, but not to develop LA tolerance or something, but as a tempo work. I give the 4x30m (< 75%) for general work - tempo - aerobic! So, you argue about shuttles, but you didnt define it well!
I see here two group of opinions… to do agility work or not at all!
People, things arent black-and-white in sport!
If there is a lot of games played, then avoid overstressing athletes with HI work (cutting, stoping)! But if we are talking about players who dont play a lot of games - then - hit it!
what about the original interval session i posted…
a guys can run 3200m in 12 mins
so he does 4x800 at 2.5mins for each interval with 45-90 secs rest between each rep…
This would not be classified as high intesity like the 5x300 x2, but still allows for a good aerobic workout…would it be a good option?