You mentioned keeping the tempo volume between 600 and 1500m during SPP, I assume this is per session, so you are looking at a weekly volume of say 2000 to 4000 a week roughly?? Correct me if I am wrong. Is this standard throughout the higher level sprinters. I assume, the higher level athletes can rely on less tempo as their overall conditioning is more in place, hence the shorter GPP. Unless, the contrary is true, and because they have used a shorter GPP, they keep the tempo volume up for slightly longer to aid the general conditioning. As you can see, I am confused, and find this quite overwhelming, especially when trying to put this into a programme! How about come the competition period, how does the tempo fit in here. What is the recommended volume per session and per week. I have the GPP download, and that gives the example of 2200m for that particular session, but I would be keen to learn how this develops later on into the training year.
I can’t really give you any useful advice, as I am only a beginner. I do have a question for you though.
What is your reasoning behind the progression of speed volume during SPP?
Your volume of speed work starts out very low at 300m in week one and progresses to a peak of 780m in week 10, before being reduced again in week 11.
Charlie’s example in the Vancouver graphs on the other hand starts out at 2160m in week one and is reduced as the weeks progress, eventually down to 1200m in week 12.
It seems that your volume is increasing during SPP, whereas in Charlie’s program the volume gets reduced as SPP progresses.
I understand that your speed volume is consistently quite low due to concerns about recovery. What I don’t understand though is why your volume of speed work starts out extremely low and then increases as SPP progresses.
I remember reading a Kelly Baggett article where he stated something along the lines of 'doing six heavy sets of squats twice per week is easier to recover from than doing 4 heavy sets of squats 3 times per week.
He uses the analogy that it is similar to turning on the lights at a sports stadium where turning the lights on initially requires a huge amount of power, but keeping them on for a bit longer is not that much more expensive. Turning the lights on for 4 minutes 3 times per week might cost $100 per session ($300 per week), whereas turning them on for six minutes 2 times per week might cost $110 per session ($220 per week).
He is talking about strength training, but I think it might also apply to sprinting. Maybe 300m of speed work done twice per week is easier to recover from than 200m done 3 times per week.
Charlie’s athletes had very good therapy available, so recovery time was shortened. Maybe doing speed twice per week is more suitable for athletes who don’t have access to skilled massage therapists etc.
That is interesting. However, using your example of 300s v 200s, are you going to the same benefits from those runs? The velocities reached in the 200 are likely to be greater, and it is likely that sound mechanices will be in place for a larger proportion of the rep in 200 metres. Therefore, is there a sacrifice in that aspect for substituting sessions in that maner? I do understand it was just an analogy you were using as opposed to actual sessions.
It sounds as if there is a short to long periodisation v a long to short periodisation.
I didn’t really explain myself properly. I meant 300m of total volume for the session vs 200m of total volume.
I am under the impression that S-L and L-S refers to the speed endurance and special endurance part of the program.
With S-L you start with shorter distances and work your way up, whereas with L-S you start out with relatively long special endurance runs (in addition to some accel work) and work your way down in distance from there.
S-L and L-S is not really referring to the total volume of work per week.
The program that the OP posted looks to be S-L, as is Charlie’s one that I used as an example.
Also, even with the example L-S program in the Vancouver download, the total weekly volume starts out high and is reduced as SPP progresses.
I only just realized how old this thread is.
mreoyn, How did the plan work out for you?
Yea this is old… funny to look back on it 
Hard to say exactly how I did because I didn’t get to run any meets right afterwards or anything. I think I was way too afraid of volume and shouldn’t have run 10 and 20m (as the meat of some workouts) in SPP after going through a GPP phase!
you learn and grow from each training year. going back in time what are some things you would do diff?
Yep, thats for sure. The biggest thing I would have done differently would be to lengthen the sprint reps. You’re only gonna improve your 0-20m time so much and after that what about the other 80% of the race (or 90% if we’re talking about the 2). Since this was in the spring I would have also entered any meets I could since I think beginners, like myself, can get a lot out of meet experience and racing for some SE work.
no changes with ur weights
Probably not the best set up in the world, same shit 3/wk, but not too bad really… it was simple and fairly effective. I think I bumped my 4x4 fsq up by like 15-20lbs during that time period.
i made the same mistake man.
Bump on this question…I’d be interested to know about tempo volumes during the SPP…Currently I’m doing 2000m on a Tuesday and Thursday (big tempo circuit and 200mx10r respectively) and then on the saturday tempo dropping it down to 1600 (CF Big Circuit with just 100’s) making the saturday a slightly easier day.
The higher the level of a sprinter, perhaps the more the activities becomes anti-circulatory and probably at a lower volume at that intensity zone. Therefore, tempo is still needed to a great extent.
Thanks for the reply Nik…What total volume should I aim to do during SPP? Would it be as mentioned before 600m-1500m or was that for a athlete with not much years of training behind them? I was planning on using 2x10x100m twice a week in 17sec 100m pace. Press ups at 15r and sit ups at 50r every other run with a walk back on every rep recovery.Thoughts?
I don’t think there is a serious reason for reducing the tempo volume -I mean, for a training element being used from day one, it shouldn’t cause any negatives to the rest of the training plan (you should have realised it by now). If other issues arise, of course (e.g., niggles getting worse rather than better via tempo from the pounding and the repetitive nature of it), then you can adjust and/or move to a milder activity (while paying attention and fixing that issue). In the post-SPP period and in-season you react based on your highest priorities (e.g., speed, being rested, competitive preparedness). Perhaps then activities such as the ones you describe between runs start having more value, i.e., similar effects to tempo giving more rest on lower body at the same time via a reduced tempo volume as needed.
Great response Nik. Having reduced the pace of the tempo to 18 sec runs leaves me feeling very fresh and not battered. As Charlie always told me the tempo day is low intensity with no real emphasis on speed or technique. The high number of abs (50r)ive prescribed my self at the end of a set are purely done because Im too lazy/tired to do them at the end of a work out.
Whatever suits you; the job is done either way.