Hurno wrote:
That volume is just so low...can't even call it volume, it's like the absence of volume.
That's what makes them fast, though anyone on that program should be doing a lot of general conditioning in the off season.
Hurno wrote:
That volume is just so low...can't even call it volume, it's like the absence of volume.
That's what makes them fast, though anyone on that program should be doing a lot of general conditioning in the off season.
SprintDude wrote:
It's complicated, but 100/200 runners that are true fast twitchers should avoid moderate work in the 70-90% range.
Runners basically have a certain amount of slow twitch fibers (type 1). They can be trained, but will never convert to fast twitch fibers (type II). Running under 70% mostly engages the type 1 fibers if you keep the rep length low. (<200).
The type II fibers are highly malleable. They can adapt to become more aerobically fueled towards the type IIa side or predominately fueled by ATP and Creatine Phosphate on the type IIx side. There are different ranges in the middle.
*distance runners - need to have their type II muscles low output and energy efficient (more runs at easy pace & around lactate threshold)
**100m runners need the most explosive muscles possible - type IIx can perform twice the power output of type IIa muscle fibers. Type IIx muscle fibers also have the largest stores of ATP & Creatine Phosphate. They took a biopsy of Colin Jackson (former WR in 110 hurdles) and he had the highest concentration of type IIx they had ever seen.
Even lifting weights will cause Type IIx to convert to type IIa. That's why you don't want short sprinters over doing the weight room, and always periodize the lifting to give them time to revert back to IIx.
I do agree that tempo runs like 10-20 x 100m at <70% are good for recovery. I don't think you should run fast everyday. The CNS must recover.
TLDR - Avoid moderate - sort of fast running that requires any kind of endurance
That's an interesting position, and one I should probably keep in mind lol.
"I do agree that tempo runs like 10-20 x 100m at <70% are good for recovery."
"TLDR - Avoid moderate - sort of fast running that requires any kind of endurance"
I know you meant for their to be a difference between the above two quoted running sessions, but I feel most coaches struggle to find that line and it becomes a hard workout at "70%". Hot take, but there is no such thing as recovery tempo runs for sprinters, especially short sprinters...it is a workout. Plan accordingly otherwise you will overwork them.
randomcoach wrote:
Hurno wrote:
That volume is just so low...can't even call it volume, it's like the absence of volume.
That's what makes them fast, though anyone on that program should be doing a lot of general conditioning in the off season.
Sorry, by low volume, I mean a low number of reps.
"You need a big base of speed and power."
-Kebba Tolbert
high school xc coach wrote:
Also, I would have to figure out how and when to fit jumps in.
Long jump approach runs are acceleration work.
The debate comes down to this...
400m runner: Depending on coaching philosophy you may include extensive tempos once a week, pre-season. Or not at all, hey, do your thang.
100/200m: Extensive tempos aren't necessary. The faster you complete a 200m race the less you need aerobic or even anaerobic glycolytic conditioning. So focus on running faster, by building a bigger base of speed and power with acceleration and max velocity work, plyos and med ball throws too. Hills, sleds, Olympic lifts and variations, whatever...the world is your oyster.
For a championship 100m/200m runner, don’t forget the anabolic and androgenic steroids, hGH, insulin, and a handful of other performance enhancers.
high school xc coach wrote:
Karma Police wrote:
Correct. I still find that use of strength odd.
If you want to run 100s, you need serious power. Gym and lifting, plyos and sleds are the main ways you get it.
as a distance coach, i agree. it's like they are fishing for ways to apply the word "endurance" to different scenarios. it's a bit of a reach.
When distance guys talk strength, I think they really mean stamina.
How would you rate something like for a 400/800 guy (51/1.58 this season) with not great speed (23.5-23.7) moving down to 2/4
Day 1: Acceleration work + Weights
Day 2: Extensive tempo
Day 3: Drills/Wickets + Weights/Upper body work
Day 4: Off
Day 5: Acceleration work 2 (sled?) + Weights
Day 6: Extensive tempo
Day 7: Off
Should I just do accelerations and not max speed for the first 3 to 4 weeks? Is it right to put in a wickets/mini-hurdles day to work on form and stride patterns?
(Considering I am like a 4/8 guy moving DOWN) should I do two tempos per week or just one? (I need speed to run 49, not miles on the track) And in case I opt for one, should I do something like a circuit training or rest? That would mean 4 training and three rests.
I read tempos should be like 70-75% so for me it would mean like 6-7x300 in 45-46 which seems quite fast with just 3' recovering (even more because I read they should be relaxed, but to be "easy" I should run like 48 which seems quite slowish.
