This study is often cited by those who favor explosive training for distance runners:
This study is often cited by those who favor explosive training for distance runners:
do you want to be a runner, or an athlete?
bodycon wrote:
One day a week, my XC team stays inside and does an hour of explosive drills instead of running. These include explosive lunges, prisoner squats, and things of that nature. From my perspective, these exercises seem to train muscles that aren't relevant to distance running, take up time that could be used for a long run instead (we do very little mileage), and lead to extreme soreness that negatively impacts the quality of the rest of the week's workouts. However, my coach (who is a former sprinter/jumper) says that they are necessary. What do you guys think?
vpathletics.com wrote:
Then you are missing the point. Going back to the original post I was responding to, we have improved on times and training. Then you came after me as I was saying that guys are running faster on all levels now, we shouldn't dismiss new training ideas and just "go hit up another run."
No, you said that Pre's times (and thus his training methods) would not be competitive today. This is obviously false as far as high school times are concerned. That's all I was saying.
I can agree on that point, but I still believe we have better training methods currently, and Pre and Shorter could have run faster with current training.
NO MORE FREE RANDY wrote:
do you want to be a runner, or an athlete?
bodycon wrote:One day a week, my XC team stays inside and does an hour of explosive drills instead of running. These include explosive lunges, prisoner squats, and things of that nature. From my perspective, these exercises seem to train muscles that aren't relevant to distance running, take up time that could be used for a long run instead (we do very little mileage), and lead to extreme soreness that negatively impacts the quality of the rest of the week's workouts. However, my coach (who is a former sprinter/jumper) says that they are necessary. What do you guys think?
Yea Mo has 130 miles in with 20 also added in the pool. Galen like 120 and another 20 in the pool. THEN its speed speed speed> So if your coach runs you little mileage..well guess what. No one has to tell you crap..you know already. You know what base you better have, if your HS then you better be able to go 3 miles at 5 flat pace...right! His drills won't get you there. You know that. So like one poster said...maybe you go 6 early morning...do his drills later, cool down gentle 3 miler after drills. Next day boom long run...like 1 hour 15 minutes. What is gonna get you to the splits you need on race day. You better be comfortable at the mile, the 2 mile etc...and be ready to fly with 1000 to go. Those drills won't do it. You already know...we don't have to tell you this.
coach d wrote:
Asbel Kiprop as been seen towing a sled like a sprinter--in the rain.
Who made him do that? Sled towing? Really? If you want resistance, what's wrong with hills?
Last I checked both groups did them and the north africans did even more. Of course both groups also did 2 runs a day around these type of activities.
LastChanceRunner wrote:
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians do them?
Your coach still has the mind of a sprinter and jumper.
SlowFatMaster wrote:
This study is often cited by those who favor explosive training for distance runners:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10233114
Great call by this poster in citing evidenced based reasons for training methods.
vpathletics.com wrote:
I can agree on that point, but I still believe we have better training methods currently, and Pre and Shorter could have run faster with current training.
What are these better training methods? Only a handful of people have run faster than Per did in highschool so why should high schoolers chose modern methods over what Pre did?
if you are in high school, this is an excellent use of time. you can always get up and run before school or after school. but little chance if the coach eliminated the explosive work and replaced it with another running session, that you or your team would be doing the good explosive work on your own.
someone mentioned being athletic, and that is the key. remember, the race is determined by how fast you get to the finish line, not how long you can run slowly. Develop the athleticism (power, coordination, strength, neruomuscular system) that allows you to run fast.
Perhaps your coach could find a more ideal way to incorporate these with endurance aspects, but they are good nonetheless.
As I said, go for a run before school. Do this practice with your team, and go for a run when you get home. voila.
SlowFatMaster wrote:
This study is often cited by those who favor explosive training for distance runners:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10233114
Summary says: "This improvement was due to improved neuromuscular characteristics that were transferred into improved VMART and running economy".
There's something I've never understood about the mileage kings. Surely the faster you are, then the more below your max speed you are running in a race (800/mile/5km/whatever). So surely even if you're a 5km runner, it's worthwhile to improve your outright speed.
Sure, a distance trained athlete will beat a sprinter over 5km. But if you improve the distance runner's 100 time, then most likely this would flow on to 5km improvements. Surely a minimal drop in mileage from sprint based training won't make a difference to VO2max (so says this study), but using that time to spend improving outright speed is more beneficial.
Speed work? This can involve drills, plyos, strength, leg speed, resistance work etc. All the building blocks you need to get faster.
I've long held the theory that - well, why do you think Bekele, Geb and Mo are the best distance runners of the lst 15 years? Because they're the fastest. Tha gives them two huge advantages over their rivals:
1. at race pace they are further below their max speed, making it feel more comfortable; and
2. they have a bigger finishing kick.
Look on the positive side. If your team goes to a big invitational that is cancelled because of lightning and rain and they decide to go inside and have a prisoner squat contest, you guys should win the meet.
Well, I think the issue is that any kid who can run anywhere near what Pre ran in high school should probably be focusing on long term development. We aren't talking about 10 flat 2 milers. A kid who is sub 9 needs to develop for down the road. We have started to establish better training methods, hence, our elite athletes are far better now than before. Innovation is a crazy thing.
As to the details of his training and workouts, you haven't given enough info to say. But the basic idea is legitimate.
As others have said, plyometrics is a valid piece of overall training for distance running, so no, your coach is not insane, at least based on what you posted. Go watch Flotrack and WOW or look at Running Times and you will find a ton of examples of elite distance runners doing this sort of work.
I also think the earlier posters about general athleticism have a good point. Many kids lack the general background of outdoor play, sports, and work that earlier generations had, and have spent many more hours a day just sitting. Plyometrics and similar work is a good way to strengthen all of the supporting muscles and systems that are not being built up just by running.