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.
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 
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 Am I missing something here?
The professional system has problems, no doubt, but that has nothing to do with one form of training vs another. Any other system of training would face the same issues if applied in the same arena. That’s why I tried to get this conversation off the topic and onto a discussion of training methods in like circumstances. Wells ran in ‘amateur’ sprints as did the rest of that group in Scotland.
The professional system has problems, no doubt, but that has nothing to do with one form of training vs another. Any other system of training would face the same issues if applied in the same arena. That’s why I tried to get this conversation off the topic and onto a discussion of training methods in like circumstances. Wells ran in ‘amateur’ sprints as did the rest of that group in Scotland.
I accept that Charlie. The pro system has many problems and flaws but I won’t be addressing them because they are irrelevant to this discussion. However, implying that the Bradley method creates champions is misleading. An exception of Wells does not make a rule. And as we agreed Wells did not run in pro running when he ran his best times.
The Bradley method has been presented via Wells as the method that creates champion runners. Youngy tried to justify the method’s credibility by mentioning a standard few names from pro running scene portraying them as celebrated “champions”. OK, they were the champions under pro rules and celebrated by a small group of pro supporters but they can not possibly be considered true sprinting champions and elite athletes in real sprinting because when they were winning their races they were winning them having an advantage over others.
Take look at this;
2009 70m race at Stawell
SEMI 4
Daniel SAMMUT (fq9) 1 5
Paul TANCREDI (bm4) 2 5
Nathan FOX (bm16) 3 6.25
Rodney MATHEWS (fq2) 4 8.25
Adam RATCLIFFE (bm24) 5 10
Jennifer OSMAN (bm29) 6 14
Now we see women and men running together in the same semi while Ms. Osman had 14 m mark over others. 14 m over 70m distance… I do not know the outcome of this race and could not be bothered checking it on their website. Imagine if she had won and if this was the final, and if she was under a coach that uses the Bradley method just like A. Wells did. Can she possibly be considered as a true champion in the same light as other “champions” who have been portrayed here by Youngy? Of course she can, but only in the pro scene while she can not possibly be considered as a champion in the real world of sprinting as she in reality isn’t fast to be even competing at the state level let alone national or world levels.
That’s my point!
So, even though Youngy who truly supports the Bradley method and has been using it as an athlete and as a coach over many years, can in fact claim merits of this method however they need to be limited to the athletes who compete under those rules i. e. pro sprinters.
There had to be a method in pro running that was better then other methods, and it happened to be the Bradley method. I give him credit for that. And I give him credit for keeping his athletes fit and ready to run races he strategically selected. His selection of races was better than of some other coaches. Do not forget that under his guidance MANY other athletes NEVER made it. Youngy would claim they were never too serious about it etc. Yeah sure, blame the athletes not the coach…And that’s where this story ends. In the pro world.
While in amateur running it was ONLY Wells who made it to the top level using this method. Period. As I pointed out he (Wells) was perhaps better suited to this particular training than other sprinters at the time. I compared weight lifting suitability using Ben and Kim. And Wells made a good choice because it worked for HIM.
I understand that JB has been running a business selling his “invention” as an accessory not only to boxers but to pro runners. There is a warehouse in Keilor in Melbourne where many pro runners flock to get their gear for the season. I do not hear that many amateur sprinters use it. So if there is a commercial reason (I do not know just speculating here) that the use of speed balls is promoted, I would understand that. But it would be fair to mention it, if it is the case.
Has anyone in other parts of the world (apart from those countries that are familiar with the pro running) ever heard of Bradley or perhaps Aaron STUBBS 11.928 3 7.25 who won the 2009 Stawell Gift running off 7.25m over 120m distance…hm, hang on…he did not run 120m, instead he ran 112.75m in 11.93sec. I bet they did not!
This time would translate to perhaps 10.70sec over 100m…a truly fast champ one would say! I am not trying to diminish his achievement, as I could have used any other past champ but he was the most recent and it was easy to find this info on the Internet without spending much of my time looking for the data.
Have look at this;
100 m Männer +0,3 22.07.2009
2. Zeitvorlauf
- Hunter, Thomas 1983 USA USA 10,35 sec. q
- Mpuang, Thuso 1984 RSA Südafrika 10,67 sec. q
- Pedneault, David 1986 CAN Kanada 10,71 sec. q
- Amoo, Seth 1983 GHA Ghana 10,72 sec. q
- Wiggins, Ernest 1982 USA USA 10,90 sec. q
Has anyone heard of Seth Amoo, ever? I have not. BUT he did run 10.71, too! What does this tell you?
It tells me that there are other people around the world, and MANY of them, who can run as fast as the reigning Stawell Champ did, and faster but are not considered “champions”. Well, I guess because they did not run at Stawell but imagine if they had been coached by Bradley or someone that uses his methodology!?! That would made a world of difference
Finally, if coaches around the globe want to use the Bradley method - sure by all means, be my guests. I won’t.
I understand that JB has been running a business selling his “invention” as an accessory not only to boxers but to pro runners. There is a warehouse in Keilor in Melbourne where many pro runners flock to get their gear for the season. I do not hear that many amateur sprinters use it. So if there is a commercial reason (I do not know just speculating here) that the use of speed balls is promoted, I would understand that. But it would be fair to mention it, if it is the case.
Sevo, in regards to the above ‘speculation’, Youngy to confirm, i’m pretty sure Jim has never actually owned the business which sells the boxing products. The owner recognised JB was a ‘known’ figure-head using boxing products and therefore uses the name to keep pushing the product. You should probably research this sort of stuff before ‘speculating’.
Yes, i’ve heard Youngy mention this fact about the JB Speedball Co also, Jim does not own the business.
Thanks.
The owner recognised JB was a ‘known’ figure-head using boxing products and therefore uses the name to keep pushing the product. You should probably research this sort of stuff before ‘speculating’.
I do not have time to do research before I speak on online forums under a pseudonym and in casual environment, as I think it is not needed. I lack of credibility or influence over anyone anyway, as it has been pointed out by Youngy, so I am not worried about these things. However, I have pointed it out to be a speculation. A speculation is not a fact, we all know that.
This is getting funnier with every Sevo post. 
Sevastocrator said “I do not have time to do research before I speak on online forums under a pseudonym and in casual environment, as I think it is not needed.”
In all the crap you’ve posted to date this is by far the truest comment you have made to date. Seems like you haven’t had time to do much research at all on Jin Bradley other than casually observing the results from a few stables that haven’t achieved much. Maybe its the coaches, not the methods?
“No. no” says Sevo - “It’s all Jim’s fault - damn that Bradley! He’s channelling himself through these coaches and making all their runners slow”
Does it occur to you Sevo, that given the rather barren landscape of sprinting talent in Australia today, there’s a lot of coaches out there who are failing with all sorts of methods? Or is it just those who use Jim’s methods?
To be honest over the last 20 years or so, I have encountered numerous non-believing Bradley critics stuck in their amateur ways, and whilst it is a little annoying at times, it is water off a duck’s back. :rolleyes:
Not sure what your motive is but you might want to take some time out and get this Bradley paranoia out of your system - I can assure you, he isn’t the problem. 
Youngy
If JB way isn’t an amateur way I do not really know which one is… I mean the guy completed… what year 10? Should I trust him?
P.S. BTW, as per Charlie’s instructions Youngy you should be more civil. When I apparently was not civil (trying to post similar type of humor) my msg. got deleted. So instead trying to put shit on me (which simply isn’t working) focus on the topic and defend the Bradley method if you can, of course. Don’t bother talking about me, my credibility, how little I know etc. because it sounds rather pathetic. You can do better than that, I guess.
Oh dear!! Apparently then all one needs to do to
win a Stawell Gift is run faster than the equivalent
of 10.70 - REALLY??? Seems to me that many of
these elite or amateur or whatever you call them
fast guys have tried and FAILED!! Its a tough
series of races and cannot be compared in any
way to an “amateur” 100m on bouncy red stuff!
The arguments put forward here to discredit the
Bradley system make no sense. Using the Pro
Circuit to illustrate the argument is ludicrous. Surely
anyone doing 6 x 3min rounds on a speedball
PROPERLY on a consistent basis MUST improve!
Well it couldn’t make you slower now could it !!
Apparently then all one needs to do to
win a Stawell Gift is run faster than the equivalent
of 10.70 - REALLY???
Oh no. It very much depends on the mark one gets. So in fact, to win the Stawell gift one needs to be strategic, run slightly slower, stay undetected, score a batter mark, peak at Stawell, and execute all the races right to win it.
If one keeps improving (as one would want to do so in the mainstream sprints) over the season he will be on the radar, will be pulled back and WON’T win it.
This is the reason why majority of pro runners fail to improve their running times. You can not learn to run a little bit slow, then try to run real fast in one or over 3 races and then again continue running reasonably slow so you are not hit with a more unfavourrable mark.
There is no system in pro running that will switch on your ability to run fast today while the next day you simply switch it off.
It is either impossible or one is cheating. Therefore the Bradley method is the method that kept some pro runners well prepared and conditioned for gifts but they would never make it in the mainstream sprints simply because they were never prepared to run every single race to their max. potential.
Ask yourself why M. Green or O. Thomson couldn’t win the Stawell gift eventhough they were the fastest runners on the day.
Speed ball hitting does not make you run fast.
Stormbikes wrote: “Oh dear!! Apparently then all one needs to do to win a Stawell Gift is run faster than the equivalent of 10.70 - REALLY??? Seems to me that many of these elite or amateur or whatever you call them fast guys have tried and FAILED!! Its a tough series of races and cannot be compared in any way to an “amateur” 100m on bouncy red stuff!
The arguments put forward here to discredit the Bradley system make no sense. Using the Pro Circuit to illustrate the argument is ludicrous. Surely anyone doing 6 x 3min rounds on a speedball PROPERLY on a consistent basis MUST improve!
Well it couldn’t make you slower now could it !!”
Thanks Stormbikes,
You are 100% right.
I first got interested in Jim’s training methods in the early 1980’s when Neil King was dominating the professional running scene. Once the amateurs opend up to allowing pro runners to compete, Neil’s athletes were very competitive on the national stage and two of them represented Australia.
This mirrored the success of Wilson Young in Scotland in the 1970’s.
Unfortunately both Wilson Young & Neil King only coached for about 6 to 7 years and consequently Jim’s methods have been fundamentally restricted to the professional running circuit with very little exposure beyond the pro-circuit, despite Allan Wells’ spectacular career.
Anyway since the early 80’s I have devoted an enormous amount of time studying results of those who have trained under Bradley’s protocols and learned that of those coaches who were seriously devoted to Jim’s methods (and there were only a few in Australia & Scotland) the improvement was substantial in the vast majority of cases.
I have reams of documents & articles that I’ve collated over 25 years that in my mind prove conclusively that if done correctly (with the right person in control) a coach can enjoy a very successful career developing fast athletes using Jim’s protocols.
Unlike North America where a person’s success is celebrated & encouraged, there is something in Australian culture called the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ and unfortunately instead of looking into what has contributed to the success, ‘we’ tend to seek out any negatives and attempt to tear the person down.
By extension, coaches who have no interest in professional running are understandably not going to entertain anything the sport has to offer. They are simply not interested in anything to do with the sport, especially any training methods unique to it. It would take a massive paradigm shift.
Jim Bradley has been an object of derision from many who refuse to understand nor accept that Jim Bradley’s success has been anything other than a bit of luck and that Wells must have been some freak of nature to overcome such an ‘impotent’ training method.
I do not think Wells was so special that his success could not be reproduced in someone else.
I’ll leave with one final anecdote. By nature I’m a sceptic. I’ll never fall for any get rich quick scheme, pyramid selling scam or fall for any bulldust. In essence I reckon I’m pretty street smart and perceptive.
In early 1988 having done my due diligence I approached Jim Bradley to coach me. I told him that I was uncompetitive off my Gift mark (6.50m) and just wanted to improve enough that with a bit more mark back I might be able to win something. We spoke for a while, and after weighing up the evidence he stated that I’d win a Gift off 6.50m and would run inside evens. I was 28 with a history of hamstring problems, had never runs evens in my life and had never won a heat off 6.50m, let alone made a final.
As much as I wanted to believe Jim, I was sceptical about his claims. I needed to improve something like 3m on anything I’d done before to get remotely close to winning a Gift off 6.50m.
Regardless, I thought I had nothing to lose so I trained as hard as I could in the gym and then flogged myself on the track. I felt terrific but I had no idea how I was going as I was only trialling with 3 other stablemates, one of which was Rob Kirsopp who could give me 7m start over 120m.
In October 1988 I went to the first pro meet of the year - Caulfield Grammar. I was off my mark of the previous season - the ‘uncompetitive’ 6.50m.
I was 3rd in the Gift and 2nd in the 70m winning prizemoney for the first time in over 3 years. When I went home to my wife, she asked how did I go, knowing full well I had been getting smashed for the previous 3 seasons off 6.50m always returning home with nothing.
As I walked in I didn’t say anything - I just went into the lounge room, sat down on the old brown second hand suede couch and sat there for a moment in stunned silence. Having not responded to her first question, my wife walked in and again asked how did I go in a pessimistic but sympathetic tone.
I looked up, opened my palms to reveal over $200 in cash, and to this day I remember exactly what I said:
“Jim Bradley is a fxxxxn’ genius.”
In December 2008, I won the Brunswick Gift off 6.50m and in time did get to run 2 yards inside evens. Bradley achieved exactly what he said he would do.
It would take a massive paradigm shift.
We should start off by letting boxers run in sprints, as perhaps they would win it all. Why? Well, they have been hitting speed balls throughout their careers that many times that, if allowed to run, would smash every single record
Thanks for another interesting story Youngy, however, what is the Bradley method in your opinion?
In a few days, when I get more of spare time and perhaps with a bit of your help we can dissect “My way”, and point out precisely which “components” of this method contributed to SPEED development and which were related to strength and conditioning.
Imagine if Bradley could have coached Muhammad Ali!
Here lies the heart of what this is all about!
Bradley’s ability to improve practically EVERY
runner by 3m or so (sometimes more) by using
his methods. That is not to say that other
methods wouldn’t work also - but HIS DID and
pretty much EVERY time they were used correctly.
The argument that speedball doesn’t make you
fast is flawed. A person is either fast or he isn’t.
The right type of training will release the potential
that is there surely. The one thing that
is clear here is that speedball done PROPERLY
WILL make you hard and tough and strong.
Sure it is only one aspect BUT IT WORKS.
If there is a better exercise to improve to core
than this one, then lets hear about it instead
of knocking the speedball.
If boxers could run fast then THAT’S WHAT THEY
WOULD BE DOING!!! This is just getting too
funny!! Seems to me that boxers do loads of long
distance road work anyway which will just make
them slower.
Once again for those who can’t read - No amount
or type of training will make you fast
if you are SLOW.
I’m still waiting to hear why the Bradley method
is so bad - waiting waiting waiting waiting!!!
If boxers could run fast then THAT’S WHAT THEY
WOULD BE DOING!!!
If sprinters were meant to hit speed balls that’s what they would be doing!
Capiche?
Here lies the heart of what this is all about!
Bradley’s ability to improve practically EVERY
runner by 3m or so (sometimes more) by using
his methods. That is not to say that other
methods wouldn’t work also - but HIS DID and
pretty much EVERY time they were used correctly.
So, I keep hearing about these stories from the wonderful world of pro running or should I use P.G. Mewett’s lingo - plebeian running.
My observation of the pro runners who have been using the Bradley method - CORRECTLY (because it is such a magic word to use in this thread) is simply this;
bench press - no adult pro runner (that I have observed) who has been using a speed ball could bench press more than 110kg
squats - no adult pro runner who has been using a speed ball could squat more than 140-150kg with half squat max. 180kg
dead lift - no pro runner using the Bradley method could lift more that max. 200kg
They could not do 100 push ups, or 100 sit ups. They could not do dead roll outs, nor their cardio was decent.
Over 30m these guys could hardly break 4sec from standing start HT
Most of them could not even break 11 sec.
I happen to know one of those pro runners who has won a major Gift and was one of the most talented pro runners I have seen. I have done some testing with him and he failed to satisfy a basic criteria even though under his coach he was busting his nuts hitting the speed ball.
He ultimately failed, got injured, gave it up. And no, he was not the only one.
Another pro coach used something like 6 high intensity days in a row during one period, and after a speed ball session with the seventh day off and then the next day after that a test run at some pro comp. LOL I said to him - when you come back 90% of your athletes won’t be able to walk because they will be injured. And they did. Every one of them!
So you guys keep doing what you have been doing in your plebeian sport but do not try to encourage real sprinters to do something they were not meant to do.
Apart from nice stories I do not see any direct info about how exactly the Bradley method can help in sprinting.
Anyone knows? LOL
Sevo, i’m not saying you cant prepare a sprinter using traditional RT methods, however check the improvement of PR’s which Brimma made, perhaps Australia’s most ‘recent’ credentialed 200m runner in just missing the 200m Final in Atlanta (5th in semi), from the time he left JB to the time he finished up with Cliff Mallett, Youngy can give you the specific time improvements. It may surprise you!
Sevo, i’m not saying you cant prepare a sprinter using traditional RT methods, however check the improvement of PR’s which Brimma made, perhaps Australia’s most ‘recent’ credentialed 200m runner in just missing the 200m Final in Atlanta (5th in semi), from the time he left JB to the time he finished up with Cliff Mallett, Youngy can give you the specific time improvements. It may surprise you!
I do not dispute his improvement for a second and I agree with you that he was the best recent 200m runner from Australia but he too would not qualify as an elite athlete…having run 10.28-10.30 fastest in 100m.
Right again Stormbikes.
I saw many athletes from a variety of backgrounds including some athletes formerly coached by the best of the anti-pro brigade go to Jim Bradley (and Neil King in the early 80’s) and improve substantially.
Speedball alone will not make an athlete fast - it’s part of the whole package that makes up the training regime. Just as bench press & dead lift won’t make an athlete fast either unless the track part of the program is designed to compliment the gains made in the gym.
The young bloke I mentioned in a previous post who had left the sport disillusioned in March 2008, but following my encouragement came back in July 2008, was astounded at how much better & faster he felt after only 3 months into the program. Yet all he could say was: “I don’t know how this all works, but this is the best I’ve ever run”. In virtually the same conditions, on the same track, 12 months apart he ran over 200m & went from 22.68 to 21.98. (Jan 08 to Jan 09).
This was typical of the improvement in athletes that I experienced whilst with JB in the late 80’s early 90’s.