A question to all forum members out there, can Speed Endurance for the 100m be replaced with heavy weights or flying 60m sprints, for a recreational athlete who competes on weekends?
How can those “replace” speed endurance? I don’t really see how those would train the qualities of speed endurance in the same way.
Heavy weights? No.
Flying 60m sprints? Maybe, depending on the run-in distance before the 60 zone, the number of runs and the breaks involved.
-
I have also thought that this was possible. Why are flying sprints so much harder than regular sprints?
-
I use a variant of the cones (for more acc speed ) where you sort of jog into the cone, then hammer it through the zone. It seems so hard just to hold the 20 meter speed.
Even the conventional cone (where you are almost at top speed going into the cone) seems so much harder than running a 20 or even a 40m from stand still. Why is this. Is it just me or imagining this?
I would imagine part of the reason it is harder is because you are maintaining, or at least attempting to maintain max V for longer. If you run a flying 30m, attempting to hit the zone already at max V, you are effectively running an all out 60m, as opposed to an all out 30m. That’s double the volume. With the intensity of max V work, doubling the volume is going to seem significantly harder!
Have just been discussing the shorter run in on the ‘cone run thread’. I would imagine that if you are performing a long run in then holding maximum you are quite possibly reaching higher velocity than if say running a 60m hard from the word go. Correct me if I’m wrong but this would result in a higher CNS output making it more fatiguing.
Are you implying that because of the easier acceleration it is possible to attain a higher max velocity?
Yeah, easier but longer, just thinking you might achieve higher velocity. I don’t have the facilities to check this but wondering if others have. I might be totally talking out of my arse but its an interesting thought.
I’ve found this to occur as well with our faster sprinters. Of course, efficiency and ease of execution during the release and acceleration phase is key.
Measured top speed tends to endure longer and in most cases equals or exceeds that of shorter MaxV zones (=<15m) sessions. There are probably other variables at work here.
Charlie has mentioned this many times before using Ben as an example. The easier start conserves some energy which can be used later on down the race which may help you achieve a greater max velocity. If youre performing a flying twenty it would seem the same effect would occur you would just need the proper distance to develop that top speed.
Hi Hawaiian how you doing, yes I agree with that, on the face of it this type of work is conserving energy. I was wondering in trying to answer the earlier question regarding fatigue if in allowing higher velocity during the 2nd section it would actually tax the cns more than e.g. a 60m sprint from a standing start.
If you were in fact reaching a greater max velocity, I would imagine you would greater CNS stress as surely the impulse frequency has to be increased. Thoughts??
Hey PhilG sorry I havent gotten back to you, school is kicking my ass right now. But when i get a chance to look at your plan i will get back to you.
I would agree with maris that because youre reaching a higher velocity would be more taxing. My questions would be
1.would this be better for beginners or elite athletes?
2.if properly recovered between reps and between speed workouts will this aid in that athlete eventually being able to reach those higher velocities easier even with a maximal start?
No problem at all, good questions, perhaps Charlie would care to answer them. Certainly regarding question 2, I would like to think its possible, I daresay that the positive outcome your suggesting is the reason for doing such sessions.