This is from a lecture Smith gave about 10 years later (1997).
I know Charlie’s going to love this comment:
John Smith’s 100m model (heavily influence by Tellez/SMTC runners)
This was Smith’s training at that time, and since then emphasizing SE I&II more:
Modeling
3 x 60, 80, 100 (walk back btw/6 mins btw sets) this one is more for technique – so the speed of the run is not of paramount importance
Sprint Breakdown – 100, 80, 60, 40, 20 (all from blocks w/6-8 mins btw)
This was taken from watching Tellez/SMTC athletes. Looks easy he said but is very taxing. Burrell was in the audience and concurred.
uses at least 3 pt stance in all workouts (even tempo). He feels it allows you to get comfortable and rehearse the start {This is a point that I made some posts above}
Excellent Technique allows you to run fast at will. So that even when you’re not really pushing for speed it will be there – e.g., workout #1 listed above.
Maximum Velocity Work ~ more technical in nature
3 x 3 x 60m @80-90% (3-4 mins/6 mins btw sets)
4 x 60, 80 @ 80-90% (walkback btw)
Real Maximum Velocity Work
5 x flying 30m (4 mins btw)
3 x 2 x flying 30m (3 mins btw/6-8 mins btw)
3 x 3 x flying 30m (3-4 mins/5-6 mins
they will lay down with feet up btw sets to relax the nervous system
Maintenance & Negative Acceleration Work
6 x 120m (6 mins btw)
5 x 150m (6 mins btw)
60-150-80-150-80 or 60 (6-7 mins btw)
in all of the runs will time the last 30-50m. They don’t push for more speed at the end of these runs. Wants a technical emphasis. The purpose of these workouts are to correct mechanical problems or reinforce technique.
Drive & Transitions Phase
Starts - 5-7 over 30m (will often let athletes do these by themselves)
Starts - 5 x 10m, 4 x 20m, 3 x 30m, 2 x 40m (3-4 mins btw) – they’ll do these together
Not necessarily looking at times but, rather, body positions.
How many times a week do these speed tech sessions take place?
Maintenance & Negative Acceleration Work is just Spee endurance, and last session is quite famous…
Did he touched the point of periodization?
2+1, 3+1 or whatever?
HSI phases go from lactic to alactic. Not that much different from CF, except for the increased role of SE1&2. What JS calls negative acceleration work like 150’s where the last 50m is timed are done once a week for essentially the entire outdoor season prior to comp. The technical sessions like (60,80,100) are done once a week when the 300’s and 400’s end and the emphasis changes more to alactic stuff.
Smith has not talked about periodization since leaving UCLA to my knowledge. But if you go to workouts or look at Ato’s log, what you see is Randy Huntington style periodization: Normally 4 weeks that builds to an overload, followed by a sharp cutback. And the overload is intensity and volume, which you can see clearly in Ato’s log and which is somewhat different than what Charlie uses in the 3-1-3.
The 3-1-3 is the max strength phase with weights, not the 3-1 system used with speed. Also note the need for variability in intensity increases as you go, giving you two approaches:
First, to drop the intensity less often, ie first 6-1 then 4-1 then 3-1 or even occasionally 2-1.
Second is keep the 3-1 scheme throughout and increase the drop in intensity as you go along.
The apparent overlap between the weight scheme and the sprinting scheme is not a problem as long as you total the load between them and adjust accordingly.
the last 50m of these runs is the negative acceleration of the run, as J.S. classifies them? These last 50m, since they’re timed, are basically some real technically sound floating or maintenance?
On a somewhat different note, how do the majority of forum members alter their set-up(as far as arm and leg cues are concerned) once you move out of max V- or pure accel type speed work, and into floating or maintenance type work? By floating or maintenance type work i’m referring to sprint-float-sprint or float-sprint-float runs?
Is it less arm-takeback or less knee-lift or both, for these floated or maintained portions of these runs? (speaking relative to max v or pure accel type mechanics)
Are you referring to Mr.Gizmo. I thought I came up with the theory of progressing work load then a drop in intensity. Looks like Randy and John beat me to it.
OH WELL LOOKS LIKE I WONT BE A WORLD FAMOUS TRACK COACH.
Mr.Gizmo… would have loved to seen some of those contraptions he supposedly put together.
PS En dash, Em dash, hyphen, ah who cares. I need some mancakes.
