Sleds Help Acceleration?

HERE ARE ONE COACH’S THOUGHTS ON THE USE OF WEIGHTED SLEDS AS A TOOL TO HELP IMPROVE ACCELERATION.

Using a Weighted Sled for Acceleration Improvement

By Mike Boyle, MS, ATC

Before even beginning, let’s clear up one point.

Sport is about acceleration, not speed.

We have a problem in sports. Coaches consistently use the wrong term when discussing the quantity they covet most. Tests like the ten, twenty and forty yard dash are actually tests of acceleration not speed. You only need to look at world-class sprinters to realize that top speed is not even achieved until approximately 60 meters. As coaches our interest is not in top speed but, rather in acceleration, the zero to sixty of the auto world. How rapidly an athlete accelerates will determine success in team sports, not what the athletes absolute speed is.

Why does this matter? A great deal of the research on speed development focuses on speed in track and field context and not in a sport context. In track the shortest event is the 55 meters, in sport the long event is a forty yard dash (although baseball will go 60). The track influence may in fact have limited application to sport due to sports frequent use of acceleration mechanics versus speed mechanics. In training for track, coaches frequently make reference to the pulling action in running and work on drills to develop a pawing action against the ground. In sport the action is primarily pushing with the center of gravity slightly ahead of the feet, kind of a reverse Michael Johnson. This may mean that much of what we currently view as speed development may have limited application to team sport athletes.

Numerous studies have discredited the weighted sled as a tool for speed development citing the sleds limited effect on top speed. In truth, the evidence that weighted sleds may not improve top speed running, does not apply to acceleration and may have led us to undervalue a potentially valuable piece of equipment. In fact many authors who have stated that the weighted sled did not improve speed, do indicate that it will improve acceleration. Our problem has been that we misinterpreted the results of the research. Most coaches spend time working on form running and technique to improve speed. These same coaches also include lower body strength workouts to improve strength. Although these are both obviously important there may be a missing link. The development of specific strength. How often do we see athletes who run “pretty” but not fast? In my opinion many coaches attempting to develop speed spend far too much time on technique drills and far too little time on developing the specific power and specific strength necessary run faster. In fact in 2000 The Journal of Applied Physiology published an article called Mechanical Basis of Human Running Speed. The article synopsis begins with the line “faster top running speeds are achieved with greater ground forces, not more rapid leg movements”. This has become known as the Weyland study after lead researcher Peter Weyland. Weighted sled drills target the specific muscles used in sprinting and help to bridge the gap between form running drills and weight room exercises like squats and Olympic lifts. .

Many athletes can squat large amounts of weight. Far fewer athletes seem to be able to run fast. Any student of speed will tell you that many of the strength exercises commonly recommended for speed development work hip extension but, not hip hyperextension. In running speed all of the force production is from hip hyperextension. The ability to apply force to the ground and create forward movement can only occur when the foot is placed under the center of mass and pushed back Although squats etc. will train the muscles involved, the training is not specific to the act of sprinting. This may be one reason we see a higher correlation to vertical jump improvement than to speed improvement through strength training. A weighted sled teaches strong athletes how to produce the type of force that moves them forward. The sports scientists like to break this down into special strength and specific strength. Although I believe the difference is minimal. It is important to understand the difference between the two quantities.

Special Strength - movements with resistance that incorporate the joint dynamics of the skill. Sled marching would fall into the special strength category. I believe that sled marching may in fact be the best tool available for speed development. An athlete’s inability to produce force in the action of sprinting becomes glaringly obvious in sled marching.

Specific Strength - movements with resistance that are imitative of the joint action. I would place sled running in the specific strength category

In the past coaches have recommended that resisted speed development work must not slow the athlete down more than 10% or must not involve more than 10% of the athletes bodyweight. These recommendations seem to be based on motor learning research that indicated that excessive loads would alter the motor patterns of activities like sprinting or throwing. I have always felt that there was a missing link to speed development but, until a few years ago this so called “10% rule” kept me from aggressively pursuing my gut feeling. Presently, my feeling is that loads up to and exceeding the athletes’ bodyweight can be used for special strength work as long as the athlete exhibits a similar motor pattern. Think of sled marching as a special type of leg press. Athletes incorporate the joint dynamics of sprinting through hip hyperextension against resistance. This can be an extremely heavy movement as long as we get a technically sound march action ( perfect posture)

With sled running, the approach moves toward specific strength. In sled running the loads will obviously be lighter but, I still do not follow the 10% rule. The main variable in sled training is not the weight on the sled but, the motor pattern. If an athlete can hold an acceleration position and run without altering mechanics than this is a specific strength exercise for sprinting. Why should we be limited by arbitrary guidelines like a 10% load or a 10% decrease in speed. Over twenty yards, ten percent is 2 one-hundreths of a second. The key should be to look at the athletes posture and motor pattern. If the athlete has to alter the mechanics to produce the desired action than the load is too heavy. The so-called 10% rule does not allow us to apply progressive resistance concepts to this form of training.

Another obvious but overlooked variable that alters the so-called 10% rule is the surface being run on. Loads placed on the sled will be lighter on grass and heavier on AstroTurf. This simply relates to coefficient of friction. Less weight produces a large amount of friction as the sled moves through grass. On Astroturf or a similar surface, the same weight would be too light. Another variable is a flat sled versus a double runner sled. A flat sled will again produce greater friction and as a result will necessitate a lighter load on the sled to get a similar effect. I have gone so far as to surf on towels indoors behind our athletes in a well-waxed hallway.

The reality is that we may have misinterpreted the message when it comes to resistance training for sprints. Although research shows that sled training may not improve the athletes ability to run at top speed, it will help the athlete to get faster. Remember, sport is about acceleration, not top speed. Very few team sport athletes ever get to the what track coaches like to call absolute speed mechanics. The weighted sled may be the most underrated tool for speed development due to our misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the research and terminology surrounding speed development.

Nice article.
Can you elaborate more on the marching? Are we talking here actual marching, slow and all?

Nice math there Mikey :slight_smile:
I agree sleds are good but I never tried the very heavily loaded sled marches. I know KellyB likes them but I have been too lazy to overcome the inconvenience of trying high load sled marches in our facility.

Specificity arguements usually fall down upon close examination, but, when you start talking about sled marching, specificity falls harder than usual.
A 10% reduction in running time with a light sled is very effective- and, BTW, 10% represents a difference of 10ths not 100ths!
I’ve found that sled marches are not specific, unless you’re a sled dog, and, in fact, risky for tendon irritation under the butt.
Also, top speed only occurs at 60m for the very highest level sprinters. For most sports, top speed is achieved by 30m, but that doesn’t really shift the emphasis away from accel work- it just limits it to 30m or less.
Stick to 30m and shorter and 10% time decrement or less and you should be fine. Exceed these at your peril.

Oh you mean Mike Boyle’s claim that sled pulls are the single greatest exercise on the face of the earth is wrong!Gee never would have figured that the starter of the first strength for profit business would be so far off base.

Not sure there’s much profit in sleds as you can make your own so easily- or get a used tire if you’re working on grass.

Yeah true.

The thing that amazes me about this guy is he lives in Reading, Ma. Thats where I have lived for the majority of my life. Just how, oh how, did he become so successful.

Besides a bartending job and serving as the BU strength coach for several years he has almost no credentials. He tells kids to run without stretching, do distance training then squat. He gets all the Reading High kids to go to his camps because Reading is a hockey school. Unfortunately they don’t realize until its too late… and the rich parents in Reading (which is a wealthy town) will pay anything to see their sons or daughters get a scholarship!

Whenever the chance is presented to warn people about Boyle I do. Especially in Reading. But what does a 16 year old hockey player know about training, especially when his/her parents are willing to pay.

There has to be a way to put this guy out of business.

-The Guy

You’re full of it ‘The Guy’ but thank goodness YAS.

I’d never battle experts so I look for clarity in Charlie and Boyle’s thoughts, but I get tired of reading your nonsense.

You obviously don’t know Mike’s programs at all. His athletes go through a static stretch, then a dynamic stretch before any running, plyos or sled work. He does absolutely no distance work with anyone, he dispises it for athletes in non-endurance sports. It’s tempo runs, slideboard conditioning, or bike when necessary.

And I guess his program for training hockey players is so bogus that his BU team since he has been there is only one of the most successful in NCAA history, not to mention other people he has influenced and have succeeded, such as the Anaheim Ducks S&C, 2007 Stanley Cup Champs.

Dont tell me what I know.

Your talking to a guy that lives in the same town as him and knows most of the athletes that have attended his camps.

Plus I get his stupid cable access stuff.

Dont tell “The Guy” what he knows. This isn’t about BU. Either way…How good is the 1AA football team at BU. Oh yeah they cut the program. How about their basketball program. BU couldn’t hold a flame to some of the schools in the south. As for hockey BU gets good talent, period. Plus, dont you dare give the head coach any credit. And do you realize almost all the college hockey programs in New England are good. Whats their secret, a good strength training program. Does Mike Boyle coach all of New England?

Listen to me. Next time your at a lecture listening to him speak, in the back of your mind somewhere, you’ll be wondering, am I the reason this guy just bought a flat screen tv for his home in Reading,Ma…and rightfully you should.

I mean in one town, you got the guy from Boston (yours truly), Hal Croft: the winningest US coach in high school track and field history, and Larry Warnock arguably one of the best massage therapists in the country. And just a town over, a facility which hosts a NIKE trainer (head linemen trainer for their football camps). What are the chances of all these people passionately hating Mike Boyle. Huh?

I know what you all are thinking. What gives you the right to say all this. Its called “Balls baby.”

-THE GUY

Ummm, sounds more like “Envy baby.”

No “Balls Baby.”

Envious Please!

Scam your way to a nice house and family. F-that. He needs to refund all those athletes who attended his Body By Boyle camps that Arrogant prick! I hate him and all his stupid followers, yourself included.

This Ahole is ripping these kids off, telling people blatenly he steals from other coaches. Then taking credit where credit is not deserved.

Woah! Woah! That’s enough of that. People come here to the discuss training issues only.

With respect to the subject at hand, here’s one of those studies that say Boyle’s full of you-know-what:

http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/UserFiles/File/Sport%20Science/Theory%20&%

Results
Time analyses were undertaken for the maximum speed phase of the 50m run,
before and after the eight week training programme of the study in order to
examine if there were any differences between those trained in flat running (1st
team) and those trained in resistance towing (2nd team). The results are
presented in the following tables per research team. The control team results are
also presented there. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for the statistical
analysis — it is applied to a small sample with dependent variables.

The results showed that only the first team which trained exclusively on flat
running showed significant statistical changes in performance between the first
and last timed sessions. The results achieved for this group were as follows:

20-40m 0.08 (p<0,05)

40-50m 0.04 (p<0,05)

20-50m 0.12 (p<0,05).

On the contrary, the second team which concentrated solely on resistance towing
did not show any improvement in the 20-50m distance. The average time for this
distance was worse in the final timed session by 0.01.

Yes, this times the maximum speed phase (not for top sprinters), but it also timed the 20-40m phase, which takes in the football 40y.

What I don’t get is if acceleration really is 60-65% of a 100m as Tellez said–and even more for team sports–why don’t people just go out there with blocks or 3-pt, and just accelerate: 10m, 20m, 30m, 40m, and so on?

Too simple?

Sleds work for my athletes. This sounds like a good study for Ken Jakalski to challenge.

Last week when I was at the track, there was a high school girl–obviously a beginner–with a private coach. No tempo, just a couple of laps jogging for conditioning, a few basic drills (mostly with a strength emphasis).

Her coach had one of the resistance belts with quick release for so-called overspeed effect, and her only real training consisted of a few runs struggling (the correct word) against the resistance. There were no falling or lying starts, or any attempt to learn or practice acceleration form, and when running against the belt, she became almost completely vertical, hips in exactly the wrong position, and the whole episode was a perfect example of how practice make permanent, not perfect. She was practicing how to accelerate with precisely wrong mechanics.

Unfortunately, I think this is an example of what usually happens when training with a sled or tire–practicing bad acceleration mechanics. I fail to see how overspeed can be seen as wrong mechanics (it is, of course) and at the same time weight sleds can be seen as good. And there seems to be plenty of peer-reviewed research to back this up.

http://www.coachr.org/speedimprovement.htm

I wouldnt call this a study, I would call it laughable. Looks like it was written by some college kid looking for a grade.

Yep 4x50m 100% 3x/week with a 5kg sled with kids who run 1.15 flying 10m. If the students were timed for 0-10m, 10-20m, and 0-20m then where is that data? Didn’t completely agree with his conclusion maybe? I love studies like this:rolleyes:

His own study says “Resistance pulling has been the basic training practice of some very successful sprinters such as Koch, Gohr, Ashford, Krabbe and Christie”… He’s rebutting this with kids who run 12.x?

That would be your Short-2-Long concept. Works quite well for some.:slight_smile:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=We8oBQdq2dk (no stretch warmup)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR9GrHZkofo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CrF0Rqna0I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRA_8jrlT3U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWrkZUn_xnI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06G7VVgjg_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAUwgrazCg4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1thPCt0a9IE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AFHZ20s2Ho
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVF9kmY9UzY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7TUo1VPuSI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWLg7MrA9y4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1s7cgOM6JQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj_j6dM7rP0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPa9-fpqnUEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4LBXLpFiPY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATtb8D-RN0Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPa9-fpqnUE