I don’t know if you are familiar with their training theory, it involves no sprinting, but the improvements of strength to weight ratio is what they preach as the best way to increase speed.
So question, as it has been consistently shown by him, Joe Defranco, and Jay Schroeder that acc. capabilites can be built without the use of the track, could we suggest that it is possible to build a sprinting program centered around getting a better strength to weight ratio in the weight room, with track work only consisting of Max V and SE work(ie. Long acc, flying runs, 120’s, 150’s…), as the weight room would be the stimulus for increasing strength to weight ratio, thus acc.
at early stages strenght to weight ratio will improve performance…application of force will be far more important at higher levels…(sub 4.2 or sub 10.4)
Forgive me for my confusion on your comment, but what do you mean exactly, specifically about the application of force? I thought improved strength/RFD/reactive ability led to better application of force…maybe im mistaken…
Improved strength, RFD etc… will lead to a higher magnitude of force but you need to be able to apply it. This requires specifc sprint training to inforce the correct motor firing patterns. Clemson’s example is for high level athletes but for your average or young (in training yrs) athlete weight work may suffice, at this level the most important factors, which are the ones which will produce the greatest performance increases, are max speed and speed end. There’s only so much time you can save practicing perfect start technique, greater power however, like you say, will improve accl’ on it’s own.
The thing is, if these guys designed a speed program for sports, this means that although these athletes won’t be doing specific sprint training they’ll still be applying it when they train in their sports (in which they’ll almost certainy be doing a ton of quick accels) and thus will get reasonable benefits without hitting a track.
While I agree with that, I’d also like to add that one reason Charlie’s programs always have a lot of acceleration work is because
How are you going to endure speed or achieve new speed if you cant get up to speed quickly?
and 2) Most athletes initially lack the core strength to hold the “sprint position” long enough for 60+m
and 3) Most sports do not require true Max V to be achieved, but almost every sport requires great accelerative capabilities.
I think it would be wholly wrong to not have any acceleration work in a program for a developing athlete.
Remember, these programs are applied to athletes with long seasons and very short prep periods when they have access to these athletes and these athletes generally require acceleration over very short distances.
As for the second part, without accel work up to higher speeds (accel for longer distances), how will you progress to the speeds required for the Top Speed runs?
Ok so since speed achieved in longer acc. to supplement max V work could not be achieved using this method, it would not be the “optimal” way for a pure sprinter, but due to the very short acc. requirements of the sports played by these athletes it is an acceptable approach. As well because as you said they only have like 6 weeks with the athletes it is not enough time to engage in an effective sprint program(GPP, Acc. phase, etc…)
Generally, because specific sport requirements are met within the sport itself, and because, often, team training methods emphasize more endurance related activities during the season, training to the “left” (power) side of the equation make sense- the less time available and the more endurence (right)the in-season program is, the more to the left for the off- season training.