Special Endurance revisited

[RandyG]

While reading through the Barry Ross I came across a brief discussion on special endurance. This motivated me to look a little further in to it’s use/purpose.

These are a few of Charlies responses to questions on SE that I’ve compiled when doing a search on the site:

1. Can special end make you faster when introduced early? The answer is probably yes and no. SE does have an effect on the density of muscle and cross-linking, similar to that produced by maximal efforts in lifting or short speed, though achieved via another, complementary mechanism. In terms of perfecting execution patterns, the small number of reps possible and the physical state in the late stages of the runs, makes SE a poor primary learning opportunity. I think, for most people, SE is most complementary when introduced after most of the speed and almost all of the technique is already in place.

2. Q1: Can SE replace weights for someone bordering on being too big?
   A: No. SE will be synergistic with the strength from weights so long as the stimulus from weights is maintained via a maintenance phase, otherwise the qualities will begin towards endurance but away from current strength. Bodyweight will likely be maintained- or, at least will only drop slightly when SE is emphasized, but cross-section will reduce and the muscles will take on a longer appearance.

Q2: What is the complementary mechanism.
A2: There are probably several mechanisms at work. First is the enhancement of overall fibre recruitment by another means, (serially vs all-at-once as in max weights, or, to a slightly lesser extent, pure speed) which can be advanced even after the primary means have reached a plateau. Second is the increased density (cross-linking) which causes a given amount of heat, generated by work, to be contained in a smaller volume, which, along with increased micro-capillarization from tempo, concentrates more heat within muscle fibres. Greater heat and proximity of fluid around the MM neurons lowers electrical resistance allowing the Int Fibres to take on FT characteristics.

I guess the real question is, if you have two identical 100/200 athletes and the only difference in there training is that one has included special E in their training and the other has not, what or where would the difference rest in their performance? :o The roles of accel, maxV, speed E and tempo are easy to see, but special E is still unclear to me.

Hope I’m not beating a dead horse. But this site always challenges me to revisit old theories, concepts etc.

Thanks

[Charlie_Francis]

Special Endurance of some sort must be included for success but I suppose it depends on definitions. Spec endurance 1 and 2 covers runs from 8 sec up. The confusion comes in when we use the terms Special End 1 and Speed Endurance interchangeably. A sprinter might limit SE to SE1 but the option should be kept open. Even in the later stages, Ben did venture into SE2 on occasion.

[TMSSF]

I completely agree with your curiousities in this matter. The junior athlete that I worked with has totally adapted to the long-to-short SpecEnd Macro that began late Sept, temporarily ended mid Nov and resurfaced via splits the last 2 weeks.

However, his alactic performances (55m) have progressed as well with program change to pure alactic/maxV/maximal weight work from late Nov to mid Dec. And yet, I have a sense that his performances, relative to his level, favor the far right as opposed to the center or left.

My impression is that SpecEnd had little to do with his alactic improvements. However, I believe it did assist greatly the process and results during the transfer of work resources to the alactic SPP2 phase. In addition, maxV and maximal weight transitions (on and off) were unusually smooth and more progressive than previously experienced.

That said, I suppose there exists a range and scale with the phenomenon known as Speed Reserve.

[RandyG]

@Charlie_Francis

Special Endurance of some sort must be included for success but I suppose it depends on definitions. Spec endurance 1 and 2 covers runs from 8 sec up. The confusion comes in when we use the terms Special End 1 and Speed Endurance interchangeably. A sprinter might limit SE to SE1 but the option should be kept open. Even in the later stages, Ben did venture into SE2 on occasion.

My question to you would be:

1. What warranted the need for the occassional SE2 run, particulary since he didn’t compete in the 200m?

Another thought: Even as I look at preparation for the 200 I can’t help to think that maybe runs of 150-180m would be sufficient as in competition the athlete would only need to hang on for 50-20m. In addition the max speed reached, or the intensity, in the 150 would be greater than that for the 200 itself (drawing parallels to the use of repeat 60 indoors due to the intensity factor).

[Nikoluski]

200 m can be lost not only in the first but also in the last 50 m…

[Charlie_Francis]

@RandyG

My question to you would be:

1. What warranted the need for the occassional SE2 run, particulary since he didn’t compete in the 200m?

Another thought: Even as I look at preparation for the 200 I can’t help to think that maybe runs of 150-180m would be sufficient as in competition the athlete would only need to hang on for 50-20m. In addition the max speed reached, or the intensity, in the 150 would be greater than that for the 200 itself (drawing parallels to the use of repeat 60 indoors due to the intensity factor).

First off, if you compete at 200m, you need something beyond the race distance, even if it is a split run, ie 180 + 50, 150 + 50
Second, you may need options and should never close the door on possibilities. For example, in 1988, Ben needed some high level SE, and, in the limited time he had left to perfect not only SE but top speed as well, the SE couldn’t be so close in distance or it would compete too directly for the needed CNS resources. In that case, 2 x 200m was appropriate, even though this was not usual for him. He ran 2 x 19.5 in the same time frame in which he PBd in the 60m.

[mustang]

Randy,
A former high school athlete I coached finished 4th in the 200 at indoor nationals. In training, all high intensity work was 150 meters or less. In her once (sometimes twice) a week meets, she usually competed in two events from the following: 50y, 300y, 4x4 relay. Even though she had zero competition, I looked at the 300 and 4x4 as special endurance prep for the 200. At nationals, she was actually in the lead for about 130-150 meters, but faded a bit to finish 4th. Looking back, I can’t help but think that the lack of work in the 150-200m range, at an intensity level approaching that which can be found in a nationals final, cost her in the end.

[Charlie_Francis]

@mustang

Randy,
A former high school athlete I coached finished 4th in the 200 at indoor nationals. In training, all high intensity work was 150 meters or less. In her once (sometimes twice) a week meets, she usually competed in two events from the following: 50y, 300y, 4x4 relay. Even though she had zero competition, I looked at the 300 and 4x4 as special endurance prep for the 200. At nationals, she was actually in the lead for about 130-150 meters, but faded a bit to finish 4th. Looking back, I can’t help but think that the lack of work in the 150-200m range, at an intensity level approaching that which can be found in a nationals final, cost her in the end.

That’s a bit trickier to assess. You did have the longer SE from the races at 300 and 400m and, as well, she was young. the other questions must be the relative speeds of the longer runs, the race pattern of the 200m itself, and the weight program. Any further details you can give would be very interesting here.

[mustang]

This is going back almost 13 years, so I’ll do my best. You’ll see the meet was postponed two days due to a blizzard and everyone was stuck in their hotel. Kids were running and doing drills all over the hallways! I don’t know where the weight logs are, so I can’t provide that info, but my guess is that her last planned weight workout was 10 days out. With the postponement, it ended up being 12 days. Either way, huge mistake!

About three weeks out from nationals, she ran 2 x 300y( 36.7h, 35.5h(PR) and 1 x 400m(56)

Here is the track work for the two weeks leading up to nationals:

2/28- All-State Meet
300y ( 35.32 FAT, PR by .68, I can’t
recall the trials or relay)

3/1- Pool Work
6’ warm-up ( jog, drills, etc…)
6 x 30" on / 30" off
6’ cool-down

3/2- Track
100,100,100,150,100,100,100 Tempo
150-200 reps med ball core

3/3- Track
Stick drill work ( don’t ask!)
1 x resisted towel start
2-3 x 20 meter block start
30m, 40m, 50, 60m flying start

3/4- Track
100,100,100,100,100,100 Tempo
150-200 reps med ball core

3/5- Track
2 x 20m block
2 x 30m block

3/6- Day Off/ Light Massage

3/7- Easterns Meet
3-4 x 55 meters ( 7.2’s FAT)

3/8- Track
100,100,100,150,100,150,100,100
150-200 reps med ball core

3/9- Track
2-3 x 30m block
1 x 120 flying start

3/10- Track
100,100,100,100,100,100 Tempo

3/11- Track
2-3 x 30m block
1 x 60m flying start

3/12- Off/Travel Day

3/13- Nationals ( postponed due to snow )

3/14- Nationals ( postponed due to snow )

3/15- Nationals
1 x 200m (24.61 FAT, PR by .56, finals only and she was in top heat)

[mustang]

As I look at this now, I think I needed something longer on 3/3.

[pjb]

@Charlie_Francis

Ben needed some high level SE, and, in the limited time he had left to perfect not only SE but top speed as well,.

and what did you do for top speed? Just flying sprints or even special strength-exercises?

[Charlie_Francis]

@mustang

As I look at this now, I think I needed something longer on 3/3.

I don’t think I’d have done it there. Maybe 1 x 150 on 3/7?? Otherwise it looks good till you got messed up by the postponement which might have left her a bit flat. Just a guess on my part and I’m not sure how you could have gotten around it as you couldn’t get to a track at that point.

[mustang]

Thanks Charlie. I think it’s easy to see the influence the CFTS had on me back in 1992 and 1993. Wish I thought of that 150 on 3/7!

[RandyG]

Charlie,

Looking at your “effective adaptation periods” chart it suggests a time period of 16 weeks for “Speed Endurance-Type I & II” (8-45s). To clarify things does that mean 16 weeks for SpeedE, SE I and SEII individually? And in your opinion under what circumstances might adaptations take noticeably less than “16 weeks” or longer than 16 weeks? When setting these time frames how many such workouts, over the 16 week period, did you have in mind?

Sorry for the rudimentary questions, but I’ve been trying to clear some things up.

[RandyG]

@mustang

Randy,
A former high school athlete I coached finished 4th in the 200 at indoor nationals. In training, all high intensity work was 150 meters or less. In her once (sometimes twice) a week meets, she usually competed in two events from the following: 50y, 300y, 4x4 relay. Even though she had zero competition, I looked at the 300 and 4x4 as special endurance prep for the 200. At nationals, she was actually in the lead for about 130-150 meters, but faded a bit to finish 4th. Looking back, I can’t help but think that the lack of work in the 150-200m range, at an intensity level approaching that which can be found in a nationals final, cost her in the end.

How old was the athlete?

[Charlie_Francis]

@RandyG

Charlie,

Looking at your “effective adaptation periods” chart it suggests a time period of 16 weeks for “Speed Endurance-Type I & II” (8-45s). To clarify things does that mean 16 weeks for SpeedE, SE I and SEII individually? And in your opinion under what circumstances might adaptations take noticeably less than “16 weeks” or longer than 16 weeks? When setting these time frames how many such workouts, over the 16 week period, did you have in mind?

Sorry for the rudimentary questions, but I’ve been trying to clear some things up.

The questions are not rudimentary at all. In fact there is much that should be discussed and clarified, at least as far as possible.
I will try to summarize a few points:
First: Speed End and SE1 are the same thing.
Second: You can see from the curve on the graph that, for each element, the most positive change occurs at the begining and the benefits taper off until a plateau is reached. So there is a diminishing return for continuing intensification in any one area which must be weighed against the cost to all other competing elements, even before the end of maximum possible intensification (in the case of SE, 16wks).
Third: There can be from 16 to 32 sessions within a 16 week intensification period. If there are 32 sessions, it will likely be split, with 16 SE1 and 16 SE2.
In a concurrent scheme like this, it is preferable to stay on the shorter end of SE1 and the longer end of SE2.
As you reach the end of such a phase, it will become more difficult to juggle the two as they must eventually grow closer together, so one will need to be emphasized and the other modified or even dropped.
Fourth: While there can be a serial application of SE types, ie SE2, then SE1 in a Long-to-Short program or SE1, then SE2 in a Short-to-Long program, they will NOT be applied effectively without any interruption.
This is why Double and Triple Phases are used. With a 40 week training season and at least some GPP, you can see how quickly the SPP periods get down to 16 weeks or less. The shorter the sprint distances, the more likely it is to benefit from a Triple Phase plan.

[RandyG]

@Charlie_Francis

First off, if you compete at 200m, you need something beyond the race distance, even if it is a split run, ie 180 + 50, 150 + 50
Second, you may need options and should never close the door on possibilities. For example, in 1988, Ben needed some high level SE, and, in the limited time he had left to perfect not only SE but top speed as well, the SE couldn’t be so close in distance or it would compete too directly for the needed CNS resources. In that case, 2 x 200m was appropriate, even though this was not usual for him. He ran 2 x 19.5 in the same time frame in which he PBd in the 60m.

Are you saying that the SE served as a safe means to perform high intensity work without taking way from the event itself?

Another queston :

What did SEI and SEII do for Ben at a:

1. Development level?
2. Sub Elite level?
3. Elite level?

[Charlie_Francis]

@RandyG

Are you saying that the SE served as a safe means to perform high intensity work without taking way from the event itself?

Another queston :

What did SEI and SEII do for Ben at a:

1. Development level?
2. Sub Elite level?
3. Elite level?

Re Q1: If I understand you, then SE2 could fill that role though the event itself takes on the role of SE commesurate with its own duration. This becomes more important where there will be a lot of meets or where race learning/perfecting is of increased importance, ie hurdles vs flat sprints.
Re Q2: Development level: Emphasis on Pure speed and accel work combined with general fitness and tempo.
Sub Elite: Emphasis on Speed and SE2, with general fitness moving towards weights.
Elite: Emphasis on Speed, SE1, and Weights.

[RandyG]

@Charlie_Francis

Re Q1: If I understand you, then SE2 could fill that role though the event itself takes on the role of SE commesurate with its own duration. This becomes more important where there will be a lot of meets or where race learning/perfecting is of increased importance, ie hurdles vs flat sprints.
Re Q2: Development level: Emphasis on Pure speed and accel work combined with general fitness and tempo.
Sub Elite: Emphasis on Speed and SE2, with general fitness moving towards weights.
Elite: Emphasis on Speed, SE1, and Weights.

First off, if you compete at 200m, you need something beyond the race distance, even if it is a split run, ie 180 + 50, 150 + 50
Second, you may need options and should never close the door on possibilities. For example, in 1988, Ben needed some high level SE, and, in the limited time he had left to perfect not only SE but top speed as well, the SE couldn’t be so close in distance or it would compete too directly for the needed CNS resources. In that case, 2 x 200m was appropriate, even though this was not usual for him. He ran 2 x 19.5 in the same time frame in which he PBd in the 60m.

My first question in the previous post referred to the example you gave regarding Ben’s need for SE2 late in the season.

[RandyG]

@Charlie_Francis

Re Q1: If I understand you, then SE2 could fill that role though the event itself takes on the role of SE commesurate with its own duration. This becomes more important where there will be a lot of meets or where race learning/perfecting is of increased importance, ie hurdles vs flat sprints.
Re Q2: Development level: Emphasis on Pure speed and accel work combined with general fitness and tempo.
Sub Elite: Emphasis on Speed and SE2, with general fitness moving towards weights.
Elite: Emphasis on Speed, SE1, and Weights.

Interesting…I would have emphasized speed and SE1 in the sub elite period. As you once said…I think, for most people, SE is most complementary when introduced after most of the speed and almost all of the technique is already in place.