Top Speed and Speed Endurance

In flying 30s you have an acceleration zone before the flying 30 meter zone.

For example:

40 meter zone (Athlete accelerates in this zone and then enters the next zone)
30 meters (This is the top speed portion of the run. This is where you are going for absolute top speed)
deceleration zone. This is where you shut everything down and coast to a stop. You do not try and maintain in this zone, you just shut everything down.

I hope this makes sense. Depending on the athlete the zone length can be adjusted (longer accel zone or shorter top speed zone etc)

Cheers,
Chris

Juggies,

Are you doing these 80 meter Speed Endurance runs indoors? How do you find accelerating and reaching top speed in the turns? I find it brutal (especially on a nonbanked track) to approach even 95% in the turns unless I am coming off the last half of the turn before the straight.

Just curious how you guys do these.

thanks

Chris

Your idea is that as long as maximum speed (ie. the fastest 10m segment) is maintained then it does not involve speed endurance. You use FloJo/400m runners to prove that:

If a sprinter can maintain or accelerate pass the traditional top speed zone (50-70m) speed endurance is not involve.

Nevertheless, your proposition fails to take into account “smooth acceleration.” Look at the example you gave for Maurice Greene: “1.71, 1.04, 0.92, 0.88, 0.87, 0.85, 0.85, 0.86, 0.87, 0.88.” Mo is capable or running +12m per sec (or .835 per fastest 10m). It is well known that his coach John Smith advocates maintaining a slightly lower top speed (TS) for a longer period. In the 400m, smooth acceleration is even more important. One does not want to use all their energy in the first 50-70m. Consequently, FloJo maintenance of her TS needs to be qualified. What was her TRUE TS (.89, .88 per 10m?).

Finally, I believe it is important for you to see the difference between perceived TS and actual TS. Do you think if Mo ran his fastest top speed 12.04m/s, he would be able to maintain that for more than 20 meters? On the other hand, if he reduced it slightly (11.76m/s) then maintenance becomes much easier. Furthermore, anyone who has run an all out 100m can attest to the fact that speed endurance becomes a factor in at least the last 20m.

PS. Some sprinters are also able to accelerate in the environment of speed endurance.

[Nevertheless, your proposition fails to take into account “smooth acceleration.”

Finally, I believe it is important for you to see the difference between perceived TS and actual TS. Do you think if Mo ran his fastest top speed 12.04m/s, he would be able to maintain that for more than 20 meters? On the other hand, if he reduced it slightly (11.76m/s) then maintenance becomes much easier.

PS. Some sprinters are also able to accelerate in the environment of speed endurance.[/QUOTE]]

I think Juggies’s proposition does take this into account. Remember that he suggests we need to rethink our definition of “speed endurance”. The most appropriate definition, I think, is that speed endurance manifests itself only once your highest speed is reached. Whether you accelerate “Smoothly” or all out, whether you hit your top speed or a “relaxed” max makes no difference. While relaxing might lengthen the distance over which you run at your “highest” speed, you must still, nevertheless, reach and subsequently maintain that high speed. The speed might be distributed more evenly, but the (non-wasted) energy output remains the same

In flo-jo’s case, even if she accelerated smoothly and did not reach her highEST speed, she must still maintain what speed she has. Indeed, she not only maintained it, she IMPROVED it over the last ten metres. In effect, she found a way to delay the need to tap her speed endurance, but she still put forth her best total effort to that point. Her energy output, while relaxed, was the same, only distributed differently, thereby extending her highest speed. Therefore Flo-Jo, along with, according to Scarface, all of John Smith’s athletes, are perfect examples of athletes have found a way to push back the moment when speed endurance becomes a factor.

Technically, "Speed endurance " becomes a factor when you explode out of the blocks: it would have to be or else you’d fall on your face exhausted from your first step. (different energy system, than SE, I know, but still part of the energy store “continuum” that you deplete throughout the race) But this is of no practical use to us. To distinguish between top speed (where max speed learning opportunities exist) and speed endurance (where physiological adaptations occur that threaten to disturb those max speed learning opportunities) YOU MUST LOOK TO WHERE SPEED DECREASES. Only then would you truly be looking at the phase of the race when trying not to slow down is the objective.

Thoughts?? I Know not everything is as obvious to some as to
“TheONE”

Two quick points

In reference to AussieBrad I was using the example of a 400m runner running a 100m race, not a 400m race. I think certainly if a 400m runner was sprinting for only 100m he or she would be going all out from the get go. What my arguments states is that the 400m runner would reach top speed as TheOne points out at 50m. But using Sprinterl’s comments the 400m runner would never use his speed endurance as his last 50m would likely be at the same speed, and thus there would be no decrease and thus no speed endurance.

In reference to Scarface’s comment, I think you are using some incorrect data based on his development. Mo Greene’s top speed of 12+ m/s was reached in Edmonton when he ran back to back .83 splits. The evidence I provided was from the 97 World Championships where Mo was not yet that fast, thus I believe that .85 was his top speed at that time, discounting your smooth acceleration theory. Certainly Torri Edwards (a HSI athlete) doesn’t follow this formula, as she was leading Kelli White in Paris and then faded in the last 40m.

Regardless I agree with Sprinterl’s comments about smooth acceleration and how it is essentially the same energy usage, just manifested differently.

400m sprinters experience speed endurance ALL the time without hitting their “highest speed.” Compare MJ’s highest TS in his 400m WR to his 200m WR run.

Hmmm! You went from saying that:

“Speed endurance manifests itself only once your highest speed is reached,” to “Speed endurance becomes a factor when you explode out of the blocks: it would have to be or else you’d fall on your face exhausted from your first step.”

The first 10m in the 100m is run at 5.5m/s. At that rate, I seriously doubt that one is in “speed endurance.” Speed Endurance comes into play when fatigue becomes a factor. Like I said before, some people with great speed endurance (i.e. MJ, FloJo, etc.) can maintain and even ACCELERATE in the environment of speed endurance.

Guess what! my middle name is “that” and my sir name is “knowsitall”. I am really sorry if you or Juggies found my earlier post to be rude. I will try to be nice.
It seems like you guys want to rewrite the terminology used by most coaches today. According to you guys if an athlete runs a 100m at 80% of his max and does not slow down he is exibiting speed endurance. Sprinterl you were kind enough to pointed out in your post that speed endurance is a factor on the first step out of the blocks. You went on to explain that if it wasn’t we would fall on our face exhausted, and this is so because everything is part of the energy store “continuum”. I think you forgot to include V02 max.

Nevertheless, that does not negate Jon Smith’s statement that he prefers Mo to run 4 even .85 per 10m splits, than ONE .83 splits then fade at the end.

As far as Torri fading in the end… As I’m sure you realize that what one strives for and what one gets doesn’t always coincide.

Did you stop to think that MAYBE the reason Torri faded at the end is that she didn’t distribute her energy according to JS theory?

I doubt that is true. Speed endurance is usually specific to a certain speed. For a 400m runner there speed endurance is at a slower speed relative to a 100m runner.

Therefore, unless we get some stats on 400m this is a moot point.

Word is bond! I don’t think they hear you though

Firstly I agree with TheOne I think that we all have to realize that we are arguing over theory and sprinting and none of this should be personal.

On that note listen you motherf&*%rs

Secondly, I will let Sprinterl defend himself in regards to Scarface’s comments but I think you misinterpreted what he was trying to say.
Now to point out some of your mistakes :

“Speed Endurance comes into play when fatigue becomes a factor. Like I said before, some people with great speed endurance (i.e. MJ, FloJo, etc.) can maintain and even ACCELERATE in the environment of speed endurance.”

How can someone accelerate in speed endurance? Speed endurance necessitates that you have decreased your top speed for you are no longer able to maintain that top speed. How then can you accelerate?

On a friendlier note I think that the idea of smooth acceleration is certainly valid and most definetely plays a part in the 200m but perhaps Jon Smith also promotes it for the 100m. You are correct that what one strives for and what one attains is not always the same. I think perhaps the only races (according to Smith’s theory) that you should go balls to the wall is the 50m, 55m, or 60m.

“Word is bond! I don’t think they hear you though”

I definetely see AussieBrad’s point and agree that without hard evidence it is difficult to determine who is correct. I think in fact that this sums up this entire debate. Without hard evidence neither side can completely support their point. Scarface is echoing the same thoughts I was having a few posts back where none of my ideas were being addressed. So in the spirit of friendly debate I agree with you AussieBrad that there can be no definitive answer without evidence. Since there is no evidence for nor against I think we might have to stick with our theories, accepting the possible validity of either.

In relation to flo jo, why hasnt anyone said that it just took her 80m to reach her top speed for the last two splits to be faster.

Therefore, she just had a longer acceleration phase then other people.

In terms of evidence for “our” side I thought the CFTS was pretty good support

I agree that CFTS is a good support, however, not to be disparaging to you or anybody else who uses CFTS, sometimes its necessary to bring your own ideas to the table (or the forum in this case). Charlie is certainly brilliant and is an excellent coach. All Sprinterl and I have been attempting to do is start a dialogue on perhaps examing top speed and speed endurance as something different from the conventional undrestanding. The constant fallback on CFTS and other orthodox ideas doesn’t allow for any growth.

CFTS is only intended to be a reference point and not a “cult”. If you look, you won’t find a specific formula, only a means of looking at training. You are right that you must bring your own ideas to the table and weigh them as best you can. You must be comfortable with a plan and familiar with your athletes’ work capacities to make it work.
(Rupert will search the archives for the Flo-Jo training info in the archives.

Hence my comment that Juggies and Sprinter should grab a bunch of 15yr olds and start training, its the only way you will see if your theories will work!

I realize that this discussion is winding down so I’ll keep it short.

Juggies I think that you have overanalyzed the phrase “speed-endurance” Speed endurance does not imply a sub-max speed. Speed endurance is an athletes ability to maintain speed, at maximum or not. Can you be accelerating and enduring speed? yes. Can you be enduring speed and yet still be accelerating? yes.

If there is something I have learned from this website over the past 3 months it is that running is simple. You want to increase your top speed, you do runs that you reach your top speed at, regardless of the distance or time spent running. If you want to increase your top speed in a distance of 30 meters then you run 30 meters at an all out pace. If you want to train yourself so you are able to maintain a high velocity for a particular distance you run that particular distance or longer at a high velocity.

Sprinting is not a complicated science to be anylized. Sprinting is an athletic test of who can run X distance the fastest on a given day.

“Only think of two things-the report of the pistol and the tape. When you hear one, run like hell until you break the other.”
-Sam Mussabini, final advice to Harold Abrahams prior to the Olympic 100 meters in Paris, 1924

Well said Palmtag. Acceleration and speed endurance need not be mutually exclusive. For if it was, we wouldn’t be able to have things like negative splits in the 400m.

One final question for you guys…

I am training for indoors (50/200) this year but the main goal is the 100 and occasional 200 outdoors next year.

Right now I can only get two quality on track workouts a week and one strength endurance workout a week (off track)

Do you feel that the “best” use of my time “on the track” would be spent in the following way?

1. Top speed training. Flying 30’s etc. plyos/weights

2. Accel development, short speed and block work plyos and weights

For the 50 meter indoors I wouldn’t think there would be much if any speed endurance requirement?

Working short to long would it make more sense to concentrate on the 50 meter for indoors use the occasional 200 as “training” and then between indoors and outdoors look at bringing in some more speed endurance work?

Thoughts appreciated!
Chris

ps- I also perform tempo and weight circuits (non CNS intensive) on off days as well.

I would say yes. Why work on speed endurance now and lock in a slower max velocity. Top speed is king in the 100m and it needs time to be developed.
Some coaches believe it takes 8-10 weeks to lock speed endurance inplace. So you can work backwards and start your speed endurance work according to your big races. Maybe charlie can give you his thoughts on how long it takes to stabilize speed endurance.

Great thanks for your response! That helps alot and is inline with what I was thinking as well.

Big indoor meet is in March (Masters championships) but I am going to start competing mid December. (I’ll treat the meets as training days)

I am not sure when the outdoors masters championships are happening but that is the main goal.

thanks,
Chris