in the middle of the next month I want to start a SPP in the L-S mode.
in the past two years I did S-L and my time are this:
30: 4.15 (4.5 at the beginning)
60: 7.6 (8 at beginning)
100: 12.3 (12.6 at beginning)
200: 28 (no tested before)
I think my big problem is endurance, so i Want to start a L-s program. I did 4 weeks in xmas period training on 300-400 m (tempo mode, but it was for me very heavy) and a work on hill (now i run 40m hill in 5.6").
now I have another 3 weeeks of Gpp, i want to use it to improve my Tolerance to “long run” and then I want to do a SPP l-s plan.
my courrent program is:
day 1. hills + weight
day 2: tempo run on 200-300 m distance
day 3: rest
day 4: hills + weight
day5: tempo run on 300-400
day 6: rest or tempo like Charlie circuit.
day 7. rest
finished it i want to start l-s
my idea is:
day 1. SE 1 (of vancouver program)
day 2: tempo and weight
day 3- rest
day4 :SE2
day 5 rest
day 6 tempo
day 7 rest
some advice?
but this is my problem: i never do 600 m run, so i Think I can’t do it at decent speed
so I’m thinking to do 1 day the day1 SE of vancouver, and to change the day 2 (600-600m).
what do you think? what can i do instead?
Could someone switching from a S-L to L-S modified the L-S by choosing less distances at the start of SPP, i.e. instead of the 600s, start with 300s and progress, then in subsequent years, add further distances at the start of SPP?
no john, 200-300 m is the distance of each run.
I did in the past week 300m rest 2’ - 200 m rest 3’, x 2-3 (depend on the fatigue).
and in the other tempo day I did 400 and 300 for max 2!
in the third day I do Charlie circuit (in gpp) and i can do about 1800 m total without fatigue.
I’m not a “fan” of L-S, so If you help me to use a S-l training but can improve my speed endurance…I go to do it.
it appears to me from what you are saying that your tempo may be part of the problem. If you have the GPP video (which I think you do) then why aren’t you doing the Long session?
If I recall you followed the S-L program last year verbatim, remember that is for an advanced athlete and needs to be adapted (generally down) to suit each person.
sorry john i don’t understand really well.
in your opinion tempo maybe part of the problem, but why?
i have gpp video, vancouver, and speed 1. the problem I don’t understand everything charlie says (the lenguage is the problem). in the first year, when i write to you, i follow the entire spp program and it was really excessive for me, then y followed a shorter version (2 x week of intensity and max load 400m each day).
now I want to program my next, and want to finally improve my 100 m time (<12’’).
[i]200-300 m is the distance of each run.
I did in the past week 300m rest 2’ - 200 m rest 3’, x 2-3 (depend on the fatigue).
and in the other tempo day I did 400 and 300 for max 2!
in the third day I do Charlie circuit (in gpp) and i can do about 1800 m total without fatigue.
[/i]
why 300m rest 2 min? I would have thought 90 seconds was the most rest and try and have it at 60 sec. If you did x 2 sets then you have only done 1000m x 3 is 1500m.
The next one you only did 1400m total I would expect that both to be up at around 2000m.
The main issue people appear to have volume wise is with the speed element not the tempo.
I would suggest following CF’s tempo suggestion even if you can’t do it at 75% get the volume up to 2200m as he suggests and let fitness come over time rather than aiming for 75% and having to drop volume.
because I really don’t tollerate 300 m even when i do it like tempo run (50"-55")
perhaps i must do it slower? but it will be more a marathon like run if i do it in 65" or not?
so you think i must do normal tempo but I must do an average of 2200 m?
starting tomorrow I start to do 2200m every Tempo wo (2-3/week).
So If i put 300 m in, I must do 2200 but slower (even if I do it in more than 60"?)
so my schedule week look like:
day 1: hills + weight
day 2: tempo (here i try 300, but i try 2200 total)
day3: rest
day 4: hills + weight
day 5: tempo (2200 m)
day 6: rest or tempo
day 7: rest
what do you mean with the first part of your post (look at first part…)
you think If I start to do 2200m of volume, I can do 200-300 m in a better time?
because Now i note that my 200 and 300 m is very bad
12.2 = 100 (PB, normally I do 12.6)
28.x = 200
48 = 300
I pratically Haven’t speed endurance
why are you running 300m all the time? Yes you can do the tempo as split runs but why not do it as laid out in the GPP DVD, 100+100+100++ etc Do that for a while till you can complete the whole session at 75% of your best time on the surface which should preferably be grass. If your 100m time is 12.6 and you are running on grass then I would aim for just over 17 seconds.
I’m start running 300 m to try to improve my SE
probably isn’t a good idea.
I follow your advice, and try to do 2200 at my 75%.
So, i must do it:
start to do tempo run, volume of 2200, 2-3 x week. start at the % that allow me to do 2200 then I try to do it at my 75%.
I go to run on grass 1-2 x week, but 1-2 I must run on a street.
I agree with john re the 300’s for tempo. It seems like you’re getting confused between the 300’s carried out for the special endurance sessions and the tempo sessions. I sometimes get my 400m athletes to do distances up to 300m for their tempo runs but not for each and every run. They may do something like 100+100+200+200+100/100+200+200+300+200+200+100/100+100+200+200+100 whereby the + represents a 50m walk and the / represents a 100m walk for my short sprinters they wont run further than 200m in their temop sessions which would look more like Charlie’s sessions from the CFTS product. Remember! the tempo sessions are there to increase fitness and aid recovery from high CNS sessions. Speed endurance runs are a different entity entirely i.e. 150m 15min 150m for example but these would be done fast +95%
I would stick to 100’s and occasionaly 2’s in your tempo sessions and then follow the SE1 progressions laid out in the Vancouver download for your speed endurance runs.
yes…i understand.
I’m relatively new to the sprinter training.
the only thing I don’t understand of my Performance, is why I lose such a lot speed between 80-200 (and even more 300m)?
Can anterior pelvic tilt or a poor flexibility be the problem? or it’s a fitness related problem only?
flexibility (or lack of) could have an impact on performance but i doubt it would account for the difference between the 100 & 200m. Some of my athletes have excessive anterior pelvic tilt but it hasn’t made a difference to their 100/200 time differential.
Maybe you are going too hard round the bend in the 2 and leaving nothing for the home straight or maybe you are too tight/tense on the home straight which is causing loss of form???
If you really think flexibility could be the cause I would find someone who could carry out an assessment to see exactly how bad it is.
sorry i don’t understand “home straight” (i don’t speak english); please can you explain.
isn’t a loss of form between the two race, simply when I arrive at 80 start to lose speed and at 150 m (even if I try to stay relaxed and so on)it became very relevant.
Now i’m improving flex of my quad because i have problem in recall correctly my rear leg, and i’m working on flex.
this 2 days I did:
1 day: 2200 m on street 100-100-100-100/100-100-100-200/100-100-100-200/100-100-100-100/100-200-100
2 day: 4 x 5 x 100 m rest 30" between 100 and 2’30 with ab work between series.
I must be honest, I noticed a reduced fitess respect to my fitness in november, so the work i did can be the problem. or the 3-4 kg i put on holiday (but not a lot of fat).
now I’m going to do at least 3 day a week of tempo in this form, and 2 day of max intensity wo until march (with a week of complete rest in feb) and then We start to write a spp wo.
right?
Yes you can do the tempo as split runs but why not do it as laid out in the GPP DVD, 100+100+100++ etc Do that for a while till you can complete the whole session at 75% of your best time on the surface which should preferably be grass. If your 100m time is 12.6 and you are running on grass then I would aim for just over 17 seconds.