Without including the ins-and-outs (not sure the distances/acceleration zones/etc.) or any accelerations done as part of the warm-up, it is around 900m.
Yes, those are the main things I am referring to, not exclusive to Dan Pfaff, but the way you described it reminded me of programs I’ve seen from him. Even the terminology, and some of the run distances, for e.g. the 15m ins and outs, and many 150’s for speed endurance.
Before coming to this site, I did a version of the contrast training that came directly from Loren Seagrave. The way it works is there are a couple of resisted sprints, followed by a couple of assisted sprints (this IS overspeed!), followed by 1-2 flat unassisted sprints. It appears that they’re still doing this more or less the same way.
When I did it, I saw an immediate improvement of 0.25 sec in 60m time after ONE workout…and then I got injured. The interesting thing was that after losing some races in the 4-6 weeks it took to recover, I still had fought through a plateau and maintained the new speed from the workout, so the injury might have even been worth it.
But, let’s be clear here. THIS IS NOT LOW RISK. And the risk is likely higher for higher level athletes.
A quarter of a second is quite an improvement over 60m. You had this improvement the same workout or the following one? You got hurt the following workout - hamstring? What do you think contributed to such a drastic improvement? Did you try the training again after recovering from the injury?
I must admit I tried overspeed/towing years ago also, back in 1998, I escaped without injury, but unforturnately didn’t see any improvement. Sure was fun though.
I haven’t even wanted to mention that workout until Davan threw it out there because I consider it dangerous. The exact workout I did of the contrast variety that showed the improvement was this:
2X60 accel, slight uphill
2X30 flying (30m leadin) slight downhill
1X60 on track (in spikes, from blocks)
I did not do any towing, and the uphill/downhill is within the 3 degrees that I think Charlie has mentioned from Soviet research.
I did this about 3 times over 2 years and I did see improvements…and injury. The improvement I saw was similiar to what someone with the handle Arnie I think claimed from overspeed.
I have thought about doing it again (with plenty of rest in the following days) early enough in the season, so the injury that follows doesn’t end your season.
I am not trying to recommend this workout. I’m even surprised people are still doing it, and I want people to understand what it really is. The workout itself is not exactly a secret (see my link above). Surviving it uninjured is perhaps a different matter.
Davan, I’m curious to know how many times he is doing the contrast training in a season (or a phase–is this just during indoors perhaps?) and how he is following this in the next 2-4 days of training. Does it always preceed a race by 2 days?
The effects of sprint running training on sloping surfaces.Paradisis GP, Cooke CB.
Track and Field Unit, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Athens, Athens, Greece. gparadi@phed.uoa.gr
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of sprint running training on sloping surfaces (3 degrees ) on selected kinematic and physiological variables. Thirty-five sport and physical education students were randomized into 4 training groups (uphill-downhill, downhill, uphill, and horizontal) and a control group, with 7 participants in each group. Pre- and posttraining tests were performed to examine the effects of 6 weeks of training on the maximum running speed at 35 m, step rate, step length, step time, contact time, eccentric and concentric phase of contact time, flight time, selected posture characteristics of the step cycle, and peak anaerobic power performance. Maximum running speed and step rate were increased significantly (p < 0.05) in a 35-m running test after training by 0.29 m.s(-1) (3.5%) and 0.14 Hz (3.4%) for the combined uphill-downhill group and by 0.09 m.s(-1) (1.1%) and 0.03 Hz (2.4%) for the downhill group, whereas flight time shortened only for the combined uphill-downhill training group by 6 milliseconds (4.3%). There were no significant changes in the horizontal and control groups. Overall, the posture characteristics and the peak anaerobic power performance did not change with training. It can be suggested that the novel combined uphill-downhill training method is significantly more effective in improving the maximum running velocity at 35 m and the associated horizontal kinematic characteristics of sprint running than the other training methods are.
Personally, when I was a misinformed 16 yo I undertook a programme of plyo’s and downhill overspeed (sometimes quite steep:eek: ) every two days for around 6 weeks.
Here here. I had similar results using a towing device years ago with my team. In fact our 200m record was set then (athlete was a soph) but we later eliminated the overspeed work.
Can you define some of the terms (g1g2 etc)?
Also wonder if intensive tempo actually is by my def.
If Thompson is ready for 20.0, then the conservative measure of extensive tempo is 20 div by .75 = 26.6 or slower if they are done on the track. Are they??
Is the 400 hard way (8x50) done back and forth?? We did that out to 6x50 or 5x60. This increases accel emphasis and allows a pace faster than possible via a continuous SE run.
The program has obviously been very successful and is worth as close a look as we can get.
This brings up another topic. Whether or not you consider extensive tempo or not- say that you do. For how long into the phase do you want to push the tempo, insisting it is at least close to the max speed zone before you allow it to be totally up to the athlete, based on his sense of recovery? The initial period’s speed work will not be as hard to handle as later. If you go on grass, what differential would you allow? What time for back and forth?
Early season most of the work is done on the parade grounds (grass). By the time they are doing 200’s it’s on the track I think. There is NO grass anywhere on their track facility. Draw your own conclusions on the tempos. Shaver seems to err toward the low end of the InT spectrum at least to start.
Yes 400m “the hardway” is 8x50m as opposed to Seagrave’s original 10x40m model. Shaver reaches it gradually begining at 200m.
Two athletes that I know of who came into the program with NO tempo work of any type, either extensive or intensive, struggled horribly in this program. Both were extremely good before arriving at LSU. Not sure if this is germane to your question or not.