question about allan wells training

Expert Discussion Advanced Sprint Training
124

Really Sevo, until you have formulated your own training methodology, put it into practice and produced something akin to an Allan Wells, Drew McMaster, George McNeil, Ricky Dunbar, Dave Walker, John Dinan, Steve Brimacombe etc, I reckon you lack genuine credibility to criticise the coaching methods of Jim Bradley.

If you turn out even half the coach he was, you would have done very well and better than the vast majority of sprint coaches in this country.

I’m no longer interested in discussing it. :rolleyes:

125

Youngy

In PEAK condition

ELITE sprinters - 9.69-10.20
Above average sprinters - 10.21-10.50
Average sprinters - 10.51-10.99
Wannabe sprinters - 11.00 - 11.50
Snails - 11.51+

claiming it WILL never produce fast athletes

I said - ELITE and you are putting “fast” athletes into my mouth. I did not say that!

At best the Bradley method (if implemented correctly) could produce - AVERAGE sprinters, and a few above average sprinters over 50 year period and Allan Wells!

There are MUCH better CURRENT methods that would help athletes achieve much faster results than the Bradley method. I consider this as free PR for Jimbo :slight_smile: I am not trying to suggest you should stop using it but it is obvious ( I hate to repeat myself so many times) that this method is S&C method.

126

Youngy

No need to take away what you have publicly stated and then follow it up with something else.

Anyway be my guest.

Really Sevo, until you have formulated your own training methodology, put it into practice and produced something akin to an Allan Wells, Drew McMaster, George McNeil, Ricky Dunbar, Dave Walker, John Dinan, Steve Brimacombe etc, I reckon you lack genuine credibility to criticise the coaching methods of Jim Bradley.

I do not need to have credibility as a coach Youngy to realise which system is more comprehensive and which ISN’T. I do not need to have 20 national champions to realise which system is better suited to certain types of athletes and which isn’t. You are now acting just like that guy you mentioned. Don’t you realise that?

I do not have to have in fact any credibility to have the right to express my OWN opinion. And my OWN opinion is that the Bradley method is an inferior method to a vast number of existing superior methods. Should I repeat myself again? :slight_smile: They can be lean, powerful and fit but ultimately there are very few that have ever made it to above average ranks. Anything over 10.50sec. I consider as the standard for Australian pro runners, and that’s exactly where they fit in. Face it.

How many school kids in the USA can run 10.50-10.90? More than Australian population? Well, there you go. It explains how fast 10.70 really is :slight_smile:

I wonder if I asked one of my athletes if they have been training to run 10.70 - what would they say to me, or would I continue coaching them? :slight_smile:

until you have formulated your own training methodology

My own? Why should I? Bompa, Verhoshansky, Francis and Hart have done it. All I need to do is mix it up a bit and get it ready for a particular athlete that runs in a particular event. I do not need to “invent” a “new” method putting my own name against it just to make myself more credible while saying that the Bradley method is rather limited and very much archaic. I do not need to be an inventor rather I remain to be a fairly good manager of already existing stuff.

Have you invented your own method? If not - well you can ask that question only when you do :slight_smile:

Cheers and do not act like your mate. :slight_smile:

127

As I said I’m no longer interested in debating the merits of Jim Bradley’s training methods.

You’ve got your opinions and sadly (not saying Sevo is a person of influence) while it’s shared by people of influence, the chances of someone using JB’s methods accessing the relative talent pool will continue to limit where it can go.

I know this from first hand experience.

So in my view it’s the negative attitudes towards the Jim Bradley training methods that limit the success not the methods themselves.

128

Youngy

So in my view it’s the negative attitudes towards JB that limit the success not the methods themselves.

How can I possibly have a negative attitude towards JB when I never ever met the guy?

I mate of mine has been working with his friend, who happens to be a scientist BUT NOT an oncologist, on a breakthrough method in curing cancer that the scientist claims to be revolutionary. The scientist does not have any credibility within the “brotherhood”, you know, those experts who have been charging chemotherapy at premium prices for decades. This new method is 97% more effective than anything available but because the scientist does not have the “credibility” the very first thing the brotherhood will do is $hit all over him because he isn’t the member :slight_smile:

Why?

One - the brotherhood would make significantly less money because their chemo treatments would be significantly reduced, and

Two - it would prove that these guys knew jack about curing cancer something which directly hits their inflated egos. They couldn’t have possibly been wrong all these years, could they?

Good talking to you…

129

Hmmm now some of this is starting to not make
much sense but anyway. Let me spell it out the
way i’m thinking it. I would like to see Youngy train
Asafa using the Bradley methods. I’d bet he would
improve on what he has done. Of course
we will never know because as we have been
over endlessly in this debate, he hasn’t had the
top tier sprinters to try it with.
If this method can take valuable tenths off a 10.5
sprinter, who’s to say it wouldn’t also improve a
9.8 sprinter??? If these super elite sprinters
haven’t used this method before, it cannot be
argued that it doesn’t work!
Bolt,Gay,Powell,Chambers etc on this method - i’d like to see that!!

130

mate, opinions are like arseholes,everyone has one.Why the debate/attack on the Bradley program.Either use it or don’t.

131

This thread had better start getting less personal. Make your points but cut the crap.

132

Coincidentally there is a speedball article in the latest AT&FCA magazine - Modern ATHLETE & COACH, Volume 47, No. 3. July 2009.

On pages 8 & 9 it is written by Stuart Dempster and entitled:
Speedball
HIT THE BALL TO GET FASTER

The magazine is exclusive to members of the Australian Track & Field Coaches Association.

Not comprehensive but an interesting read nonetheless.

133

This is starting to remind me of the JAAA vs. USATF threads at T&FN, except without the 12x nested quotes.

134

This thread had better start getting less personal. Make your points but cut the crap.

Charlie,

I disagree with your decision to simply delete a scientific article that did not have anything to do with any personal attack towards anyone.

I have never met Youngy. I have heard just good things about him and this is NOT my personal attack on him nor his squad. I do not know these people.

If you can not tolerate a vigorous debate tell me and I will just read the stuff on this forum but without my active participation. This just shows how some people are not cut for the cyber world or debates.

In that particular article, which I am happy to provide again, none of active pro runners have been mentioned. It is a well known fact and is well documented that these things have happened in pro running.

This thread is DIRECTLY related to that subject and if you can not see it, ask and I will paraphrase it.

If you are going to protect some and prevent others from talking openly as adults, well it just shows a few things about you. I am not a kid nor I am in need of a papa. I do respect you as a coach but honestly you seem to have a lot less feeling for online moderation :slight_smile:

No harm intended, just sharing my opinion with the WWW.

Cheers.

P.S. I have been participating in online discussion forums on various subjects since 1996. I am currently an administrator on 5 online forums and have been moderating on dozens of other forums since 1996. As an administrator, I make sure my moderators understand what their duties are and when they should or should not get involved in discussions. The following simple policy seems to work - if you are an admin or a mod and if you decide to participate in a discussion DO NOT use your powers to CONTROL that particular discussion because it can get personal and emotional, get other mods to moderate it and you consider yourself only as a member. These are basic online rules that have been applied and seem to be working OK in many communities. Also, from administrative point of view it is important that online boards are active, that users or members contribute in various ways. Unless this forum is closely related to the marketing purposes of CF online shop, I fail to understand why seemingly interesting scientific article would be simply deleted. Finally, I do not see written rules that we need to comply with…can you write them?

135

Hi Youngy

On pages 8 & 9 it is written by Stuart Dempster and entitled:
Speedball
HIT THE BALL TO GET FASTER

I will endevour to read it, thank you. I am sure you know how to handle a debate and am sure that you do not need a preferential treatment from the CF protective services.

Can we make this bit clear - I DO NOT have anything against you nor anyone from your squad or anyone on this forum. My participation in this discussion is not a personal attack on you nor anyone you coach.

I hope this is clear because there are people who obviously need to undertake a course that would help them understand a simple fact - we do not have video or audio effects in cyber debates and each word needs to be read carefully and comprehensively.

Now, use of a speed ball is JB’s signature accessory, however I am not addressing only that aspect but a few other aspects including the use of a speed ball.

Use of a speed ball is a good thing during GPP and generally for conditioning but it alone does not produce top sprinters.

There is a broad spectrum of training methods applied not only by JB but by many other pro coaches that ultimately led to stagnation and speed limitation of many pro sprinters in Australia and perhaps wherever pro running takes place.

For instance - dead running. I am sure you are familiar with this term much more than I am and you would have a wealth of info in your personal database about this.

The fact is that pro runners - and I am limiting my discussion only to pro runners because we are indeed talking about the Bradley method which has been embraced mostly by pro runners - not necessarily train to run fast in every single race.

Preparations and motifs of sprinters in pro running are highly questionable.

I am happy to expand on this subject and share my opinion on why only A. Wells has achieved greater results than any other sprinter who used the Bradley method, if I am permitted to speak out.

I hope this forum is not a forum where whimps congregate but rather decent adults and teenagers who are allowed to share their opinions freely.

I understand why certain subjects are “a no-no” on this forum but this kind of topic has nothing to do with it nor it is linked to Mr. Administrator in any way.

I hope you understand and accept my apology if I have offended you in any way.

We can agree to disagree. :slight_smile:

136

In case they don’t improve?..:wink:

Just teasing…

137

This thread is entitled “Questions about Allan Wells” and up until recently focussed on the training Allan utilised to become a very successful sprinter, which was inspired by the methods developed by Jim Bradley.

It was about the physical preparation of sprinters using the methods successfully applied by Allan.

Until he who calls himself Sevascrator decided to change the focus, it had nothing at all to do with cheating & running dead.

To post items about cheating & dead running on this thread mischeviously infers that the training methods used by Wells and Bradley were somehow related to cheating.

Jim Bradley NEVER encouraged athletes to run dead. And his training - as applied by him and others such as Wilson Young & Neil King did not lead to stagnation & speed limitation. On the contrary most athletes under these coaches improved from year to year. That is well documented and to suggest otherwise is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. In fact I regard it reprehensible and I personally find it very insulting and offensive.

As for the following:

“For instance - dead running. I am sure you are familiar with this term much more than I am and you would have a wealth of info in your personal database about this.”

I DO NOT have a wealth of information about dead running on some some data base. On the contrary I learned from Jim Bradley that dead running is 100% wrong and cheating and hence do not subscribe to it. Again I find it insulting that it is inferred I employ non-trying as a means of achieving success. This so called data base simply does not exist other than in your imagination.

Finally at no stage have I sought preferential treatment from Charlie Francis nor did I complain or request that posts be deleted.

Charlie Francis runs his website the way he sees fit and respectfully I’m in no position to tell him how it should be monitored.

Sadly not all of us are willing to accept that posting on this forum is a privelege…it is not a god given right.

138

Forgive my ignorance, but what is Dead running?

139

While it may be acceptable to be beligerant on other sites, it isn’t here.
Surly you don’t need a written guideline to be civil, but if you do, here it is:
BE CIVIL.
If you think the TRAINING is wrong, say why and enter into a debate, but arguing about Well’s traing based on the results of others who might or might not have trained the same way doesn’t help.
I met and spoke with Allan a number of times and I can assure you he was a great sprinter in his time. His program interested me because it was possible to carry much of it out in a cold climate with limited facilities and he improved from a mediocre level after switching to this type of training.
Is it the best way to go when the climate is closer to ideal most of the time?
How much did Allan’s training or timing of training change once he could fund warm weather training prior to Moscow?

140

Youngy

Until he who calls himself Sevascrator decided to change the focus, it had nothing at all to do with cheating & running dead.

LOL, This thread was DEAD since April and up until a few days ago. Obviously if the discussion has stopped for a considerable period of time an injection is needed to jump start it. Have a look at how many replies have been suddenly written during the last 7 or so days? I am not talking only about the Bradley method but where this method was applied and under all conditions that surrounded that particular culture i.e. pro runners.

To post items about cheating & dead running on this thread mischeviously infers that the training methods used by Wells and Bradley were somehow related to cheating.

Forget Wells. He has achieved his best results while NOT pro running i. e. in a sport where one ALWAYS runs flat out in sprints.

Jim Bradley NEVER encouraged athletes to run dead.

Really? Well, I have heard differently. And not only Bradley but many other coaches…some of them from Aberfeldie, Melbourne.

If we were allowed to post the article that Charlie deleted it just proves that scholars see it quite opposite to your statement.

And his training - as applied by him and others such as Wilson Young & Neil King did not lead to stagnation & speed limitation.

Yes it did at least to those that I have been observing, which I have stated in my initial reply. You can disagree as much as you may but the Bradley method is nothing more than a strength and conditioning fitness training, NOT a speed development method. Keith Livingston for instance mentions this in his book too (Healthy Intelligent Training page 182)

On the contrary most athletes under these coaches improved from year to year. That is well documented and to suggest otherwise is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. In fact I regard it reprehensible and I personally find it very insulting and offensive.

LOL. Youngy did I ever say that these athletes have not improved? If I have, let me tell you - THEY HAVE IMPROVED but NOT to an elite level because they could not have achieved an elite level using only methods that improve one’s strength and conditioning. Exception was A. Wells who trained so hard that half of today’s pro runners can only dream of while pooing their pants…and then Wells did not run dead! And perhaps your friend Brima who ran a PB of 10.28-10.30 if I remember correctly.

I DO NOT have a wealth of information about dead running on some some data base.

Well, if you do not have here it is;

Discourses of deception: cheating in professional running (1).Mewett, Peter G. "Discourses of deception: cheating in professional running (1).
The Australian Journal of Anthropology

On the contrary I learned from Jim Bradley that dead running is 100% wrong and cheating and hence do not subscribe to it.

I hear you BUT a vast majority of pro runners during their pro careers have run on numerous occasions dead, even under Jimbo. I am not going to throw names around but at least this person who informed me of it has admitted it in private. In public he will deny it.

Again I find it insulting that it is inferred I employ non-trying as a means of achieving success. This so called data base simply does not exist other than in your imagination.

Well, you may but it is a well documented fact. Read the above article. I can even send it to you via PM if you wish.

Finally at no stage have I sought preferential treatment from Charlie Francis nor did I complain or request that posts be deleted.

I did not say that Youngy. This is precisely the reason why people misunderstand each other. Read more carefully and comprehensively and you will see that I did not say that.

Sadly not all of us are willing to accept that posting on this forum is a privelege…it is not a god given right.

This is a public and OPEN forum. It is not a private forum Youngy. When or if it becomes a private forum I will not participate in it, until then some people should learn or get familiar on how public forums truly operate.

141

BE CIVIL.

I have been. What was uncivilised about Mewett’s article?

For the member who does not know what dead running means (sorry I just could not recall your user name while typing this) here is the definition;

Professional runners do not try to win every event that they enter. Their objective is to win a particular, specified race: in the argot of the sport, the one for which they are ‘set’. The set race often is several years away and the athlete’s training and running tactics are organised with it in mind. The ‘handling’ of the runner, typically in the form of the ruses dictated by the trainer, in this long preparatory period is vital to securing a successful outcome. Much of the routine and expected cheating associated with the sport takes place in this lead-up to the runner’s set race.

Harry Boyle once said to me that ‘handicap is everything’ in professional running. Rob Monaghan, a man who ran through the years of the Depression and trained runners for several decades more, had an explicit strategy of letting his runners go-off only when they had achieved a very favourable handicap, even if this meant years of running dead. Rob also went to considerable lengths to ensure that his runners were concealed from the gaze of those who might realise their potential, pick the race in which they were going-off and take the ‘cream’ of the ‘market’. (18)

Running dead is a skill learned from the start of a professional athlete’s participation in the sport. The actual techniques can differ between sprinters and distance runners, although runners of all distances commonly put in a very hard training session or run the evening or the morning before a meeting so that carry-over fatigue prevents them from performing to their true ability.

142

No one asked me to speak to you Sevastocrator. I was offended by your posts all by myself. References to dead running and the attacks on coaches was my concern as it has nothing to do with Wells or the potential of any form of training.

143

Charlie

References to dead running and the attacks on coaches was my concern as it has nothing to do with Wells or the potential of any form of training.

I did not attack a coach as I have pointed it out already and apologised for it if it was perceived as such. You keep on telling me how I have been attacking Youngy, and I keep on repeating that the Bradley method is a strength and conditioning method that ultimately CAN NOT produce elite athletes with exception of A. Wells.

Wells had achieved what he had due to his hard work and running in amateur athletics. Majority or pro runners, though, even when punching speed balls talk predominantly about their MARKS, all day every day.

What does it tell you?

It tells me that these runners are highly dependent on the marking system which can make them or break them. If pro runners run to their full potential in every race they run, and keep improving their results (times) they would be pulled back which would reduce their chance of winning. Therefore, pro runners train with different motifs in comparison to amateur sprinters. This is an important aspect of their training regime. One can call it cheating, or dead running or not running to their full potential. Call it whatever you want but it very much exists and PRO coaches throughout the 20 century AND TODAY “tapper” their sprinters to a specific race. I am NOT saying Youngy has been doing this. Hell no! I am saying that this is something that has been going on in pro running culture and WILL CONTINUE to happen. If anyone wants to deny this he/she is either in denial or fooling around. What is the point then if a pro runner would want to run faster every time he runs? He will be pulled back, as I already said and miss out on the ultimate prize he trained for. It would be like training to win an Olympic gold but in the final you hop on one leg when comparing to amateur running.

So, WHY the Bradley method (think about it) has not produced ELITE runners?

Out of curiosity, who was the fastest EVER pro runner over 100m?

Winning “gifts” and naming “champions” of pro running in this thread can be deceiving to say the least. It needs to be noted that those “champs” did not run off scratch (with a few exceptions only) when they were winning gifts as it rarely happens. Winning a gift for instance off 5-10m mark is not an indication that the person who won it is the fastest and therefore a true champ. That person had been given an advantage over faster runners who were pulled back. That is pro running, and yes, I understand that.

The Bradley method produced pro runners who were READY to run when it mattered BUT not necessarily were they THE FASTEST runners that day. They were NOT in most cases/races.

The Bradley method has helped those runners to be FIT when it mattered. This strength and conditioning method was a perfect TOOL to be sharp BUT not the fastest. Be sharp to win the ultimate gift prize but do not be the fastest runner out there because otherwise you would have a less chance in winning.

This is the reason why I am involved in this discussion.

This is the reason why I oppose the Bradley method.

This is not a personal attack on Youngy even though he tried to hit back using similar tactics that some here are very familiar with - questioning one’s credibility, trying to present the opponent as a person of less value/importance (“the one that calls himself Sev” - “not that Sev has got any influence” etc. etc. Very “civilised” way of debating that has not been moderated, I would say :slight_smile:

My claim was backed up by evidence that you nonchalantly deleted while trying to protect one coach over the other. Why? Because you (I guess) know one while you do not know the other.

And you told me to be civil :slight_smile: Am I missing something here?