first of RnR he was kidding, its a joke. Second off there are no 100m times for powerlifters and it is rediculous to ask for them as they do not train for that, but specifically for powerlifting. And due to very high strength levels they do possess a lot of quickness. The only example I can think of is Josh Bryant, who at over 300lbs ran a 4.7 40yard dash. So hes more than double your weight and runs about .1 slower than you…If youll also look at one of my earlier post youll see that one of their powerlifters is easily able to perform a standing backflip. Sprinting and Powerlifting are apples and oranges. The idea here isnt well what are their sprint times, but is WSB an applicable means of training towards sport. So please, I beg you to not return to your prior ways, you were doing well. If you want to know about its applicability to sprinting, ask that…not what full time powerlifters who have no intention of running(but could run the acc. times very well).
SLED PULLING
How does sled pulling (power walking style) in any way help people either run faster or squat heavier?
raises work capacity, increases strength, helps as a recovery method…
Here’s my take on westide principles for sprinters.
The question has been asked; do we need a DE work as a sprinter? Well i would classify the DE workfor a sprinter specific to their event the track work - accl’s, max v, SE.
The ME work obviously max strength work - Squats, bench etc…
So, one of the fundemenatl rules of WSB is to not mix excercises from different parts along the force-velocity curve. This is because the body adapts more effectivly to one form of stimulation at a time during a given supercompenstion cycle. This principle is also backed by CT and DB.
Now, the length of time of a supercompensation cycle is proportional to the level of fatigue (drop off). I think we can agree that a large drop off in sprint performance in a given session is undesireable - it results in training with bad form, which is detrimantal to speed development and also increases risk of injury - so if we keep supercompensation cycles short and utilise a ME - DE format we might have a simplified programme like:
Example 1
Day 1 - DE - Sprint work - accl’s Max V etc…, Assistance work - Plyo’s, medball
Day 2 - ME - Max Strength Work - Squats, Bench, Pulldowns, Assistance work - GHR’s etc…
Day 3 - DE - Sprint work - accl’s Max V etc…, Assistance work - Plyo’s, medball
Day 4 - ME - Max Strength Work - Squats, Bench, Pulldowns, Assistance work - GHR’s etc…
and so on…
Ever seen a world class sprinter train like this? Jason Gardener?
You may want to use a slightly higher drop off with longer S’Comp times which may be more beneficial and maybe split upper/lower body.
Example 2
Day 1 - DE - Sprint work, plyo’s ME - Upperbody; Bench, Rows, assistance work
Day 2 - Tempo (gpp)
Day 3 - ME - Lower Weights; Squats, assistance
Day 4 - Tempo (gpp)
Day 5 - DE - Sprint work, plyo’s ME - Upperbody; Bench, Rows, assistance work
Day 6 - Special End.
Day 7 - ME - Lower Weights; Squats, assistance
and so on…
Ever seen a world class sprinter train like this? Maurice Greene?
Ok, these are VERY rough examples. The point i’m making is the difference between a WSB approach and say CFTS approach is one (WSB) divides ME work, & Rate work into separate s’comp cycles, CFTS trains the elements side by side.
Which is the most effective method? They both have pros and cons: the obvious ones being:
“WSB”
Pros - Greater adaptation to single stimulus
Cons - (comparativly) Low CNS recovery time
I think the “WSB” method would rely on the assumption that fatigue from one drill (i.e. max effort lifts) will allow the athelete to execute drills of another form (i.e. sprints) more quickly than a repeat of the same drills 2 in a row. This allows great work capacity in theory but does neglect CNS recovery some what. Thoughts?
“CFTS”
Pros - Maximum CNS recovery time (reduced likely hood of overtraining, greater consistancy)
Cons - Less of an adpation due to multiple stimulation (although debatable)
In the opposite direction “CFTS” bases the recovery abilty around CNS first and foremost, but similar work is being repeated i.e sprint session - sprint session (ignoring the post sprint weight session) is possible work capacity reduced as a consequence? Does multiple work along the force-velocity curve reduce possible adaptations?
Alan.
p.s. for all you die hard WSB fans, i am aware this is NOT westide i just used the label as it is convenient, same applys for CFTS.
Nice post Alan. However, you are doing what I was advocating which is replacing WSB DE days with sprint training. This was essentially my point that classic WSB DE days were not necessary (and even redundant) for sprinters.
this is what i said before, and I think xlr8 said it too, the DE day was meant as a specific means of improving RFD in the specific movement/sport, for them this is the Squat Bench and Deadlift, and for a sprinter it is sprinting, so rather than doing a DE days, it is a sprint session, and if you like oly’s they can be done there too.
xlr8 & numba56,
i know we agree with the prescription of DE excercises, what about the organisation of workouts into a microcycle, as this is what really matters.
I think sprinting is more demanding that DE work. So heres a schedule I think would work well, I think Id like to try this. As well due to the higher demand a higher rest period is needed.
Day 1
Acc. Work
Oly Upper Body
Day 2
ME Lower
Day 3
Off or GPP/Recovery
Day 4
Max V
Oly Lower
Day 5
ME Upper
Day 6
Off
Repeat
Someone please support the argument for an advantage of splitting up days into DE&ME for sprinters. Be as technical as you like. Alternatively reference WSBC or CT or someone else so I can do some research for this.
The examples Greene and Gardener are a start, and I’d have to check up on them, any links for them would be great to.
from what I remember they are different neural functions, RFD and Limit Strength that is, so by seperating them there is less confusion in the actions and none of them become a secondary action. Because what you do first in the workout gets the most attention, whereas other things after are secondary…ill try to find the thread…
You might want to switch it around a touch like this…
Day 1
Max V
Oly Lower
Day 2
ME Upper
Day 3
Off
Day 4
Acc. Work
Oly Upper Body
Day 5
ME Lower
Day 6
Off or GPP/Recovery
Day 7
Off or GPP / Recovery
Day 4
Max V
Oly Lower
Day 5
ME Upper
Day 6
Off
The only reason I say that is due to a hard accel day followed by a ME lower body day may require some extra rest… as this looks like a 7-day micro, the normal person does well to get his/her work done during the week. Otherwise, you could do the Accel and ME work on M,T and then recover on W,R and then workout on F,Sa.
Just a couple different options… Just trying to get you to 6.2…
Keep training, and good post!
Sorry, this is what I meant!!!
Numba,
You might want to switch it around a touch like this…
Day 1
Max V
Oly Lower
Day 2
ME Upper
Day 3
Off
Day 4
Acc. Work
Oly Upper Body
Day 5
ME Lower
Day 6
Off or GPP/Recovery
Day 7
Off or GPP / Recovery
The only reason I say that is due to a hard accel day followed by a ME lower body day may require some extra rest… as this looks like a 7-day micro, the normal person does well to get his/her work done during the week. Otherwise, you could do the Accel and ME work on M,T and then recover on W,R and then workout on F,Sa.
Just a couple different options… Just trying to get you to 6.2…
Keep training, and good post!
Thanks for summary, I can try find the thread, probably one of the DB hammer ones?
I didn’t pay attention before - I wasn’t interested and assumed it was pseudoscience, I’ll have another look now.
Who says we have to use bands and chains over the full range of motion? If a sprinter has a certain problem within a given range (i.e., sticking point) in for example the squat or the bench press use bands and chains in that range (progressive range training see Paul Anderson’s training for more).
Louie also uses bands for GPP training, i.e., high rep bands. I think DB uses bands in depth ‘jumping?’ Squat jumps with chains on? Etc…
I do not think you are going to find much info on elite sprinters who train WSB, aside from Butch Reynolds. Most of the high profile individuals I know who have experienced good speed development, have come out Joe Defranco’s camp. I have a few athletes who have seen good results w/ an adapted WSB protocol, but no one who is making national headlines…not yet anyway. 
[This is quite funny, i started to write this to try and show why it might be better to separate work of different types and about half way through came up with the conclusion it’s the other way around, although i could be wrong.]
I’m a novice when it comes to the science but this is my understanding of why dividing work of different neural types might be more effective.
The force of a musclular contraction is varied dependent on how the nervous system activates the muscle through 3 mechansims:
Recruitment - the number of active motor units
Rate Coding - firing rate of motor units
Synchronization - the order motor units are activated
For adaptation to take place the motor units must be exhausted. So for a given muscular action i.e. a sprint stride a certain number of MU’s are recruited, the higher the force the more fast MU’s are recruited (although they are the last to be activated) and as they have the fastest rate/shortest endurance are the first to be exhausted and hence trained. Thereafter in subsequent actions the next MU’s down the Rate Coding list are activated and exhausted through repeated activation at sub exhaust rate (hope that makes sense) and should therefore adapt to move up (or down) the rate coding list to optimum. So as time goes by a larger number (recruitment) of the optimum rate coded MU’s are available which is why we get stronger/faster.
The purpose of strength training ME method is to increase the number of fast MU’s available to generate force when sprinting. [here’s where i changed my mind] As synchronisation (the balance and rate of activated - agonists - and unactivated - antagonists) is important in maximum force production and is specific to the actual joint actions involved in the drill strength/power adaptation in this action is much larger than in any other non-specific action. So although max squating, for example, will increase potential MU recruitment for sprinting the largest gains will be in the squat its self. This, i think may be where results have been mis interperated in the past; the increase in MU recruitment potential from squatting will improve sprinting performance, following a sprint session S’comp cycle (or 2) which will stimulate the addtional MU’s and cause a specific sprint adapation. I think squating post track work would increase MU potential for sprinting without much improvement in the squat (because a significant number of MU’s will be pre-exhausted from sprint work). Whereas splitting the workouts would see a rise in squat performance, as well as sprint performance which might give a false impresssion that the training is more effective.
I think i’m in the right ball park, perhaps someone which more knowledge on the subject can steer us in the right direction.
Alan.
To add to the above post, i think what i have said is true because strength work is very much assistance work. When it comes to different sprint qualities: max V, SE1, SE2, then these are the type of qualities that should be seprated, which for the most part they are.
How is this any different than following a 2-3RM lift with a break, then strip weight off, and watch it fly on the lighter set. wouldn’t a simple neural potentiation effect explain this?
Lyle
I’ll just have to stick to looking at the theory and science for now, thanks.
question, can anyone offer an explanation of Adam Archuletta’s 4.37 40 @ 211lbs with no sprinting? As well he does perform very well as a saftey for the Rams, continually up there in tackles in the league(hes more of a fast smaller linebacker). Honestly though he is the only example I can think of that would even bring the thought to my mind of whether sprinting was necessary in training for football…