Is there any conflict between speed and speed endurance. Can they be developed equally at the same time?
Link to the picture?
Check out the first post for the thread. Personally I think the machine is fine from what I have seen.
I realize that they conflict but what is MORE important (developing or even Ben’s level of development) in the accumulation phase of period I - strength gains for later in period I which carries over to period II and III or short speed endurance (30m accel + 30m maintain = 60m) which seems like more along the lines of speed endurance capacity which carries over to period II and III for the true speed endurance with regards to maximum intensity (max intensity - max velocity taken into consideration)?
Please note that this is only for specific program going from short to long.
Also, when you integrated this 30m accel + 30m maintain did you time them and if so did you time the initial 30m accel or the whole 60m?
Yes and yes. I’m not trying to be a wise-guy here but there is a conflict between the qualities, however, if you feel it appropriate, you can develop both in lock-step- up to a point and keeping in mind that each will be somewhat limited by the other.
Eventually, the conflict will limit the development on the speed side of the equation unless the endurance work is reduced. This is, as I’ve said before, a one-way street. Greater speed leads to a greater ability to maintain a given pace in a Spec End task because it affects the percentage of top speed required. On the other hand, after the highest levels of fitness are in place, more SE will not affect top speed and it’s role in the men’s 100m at the World Record level becomes reduced, as the deceleration componant has already approached zero, leaving more absolute speed/acceleration as the final route to higher performance.
There used to be the question of how acceleration is carried out, with some coaches arguing for a smoother, sub-maximal acceleration in return for a greater finish, but, first with Ben, and later with Mo Greene, Ato Bolden, and Tim Montgomery, that horse has left the barn! See Speed Trap for a fuller discussion on the topic of energy distribution vs the development of total capacity from one end of the race to the other.
Lol I meant the picture of ben’s back… not the machine.
Watch the race in Seoul 88 afterwards as he jogs around for his victory lap you can see how well developed his hams, glutes and calves were. Also in training for speed there is a photo of him accelerating from the blocks in a 200m race you can see the extent of his ham development.
Makes sense from a regeneration point of view to back your weight program onto an intensity session…you only have so many days of intensity that you can fit in with appropriate recovery/regeneration time between so it makes sense to overload the body in a maximal sense when you have the chance. You see many misguided periodization plans that call for weight sessions on ‘off’ days of intensity…doens’t make sense - your body doesn’t really differenitiate between a stress on the track or a stress in the weight room…regernation of the muscles/organs/cns takes time and it takes a removal of stress for adequate periods.
i’m going to build my hyper out of wood very simple to build and way cheaper than louie’s and it will be identical.
One way I’ve tried to recreate the reverse hyper is on GHR bench wrap a band around the support and step into the loops. You could either use a light band for pre-hab/warm-up or a strong band to do very difficult/overspeed (incredibly fast) reps. Sure the machine would be the best, but I wouldn’t even consider buying it unless I had the best possible power rack, Several Bars, Enough weights, a GHR, dumbbells, med bal . I would put it ahead of a bench though.
check out this link and load up the one entitled 1 leg reverse hyper on the right column…it is an alternative if your gym has an ankle strap and a pull system…Have not tried it but maybe on a day when I am feeling extra flexible!!!