Does Extensive Tempo impede speed development?

And btw, I am not a sprinter. Someone in another thread implied that I try to pose as a "speed" guy. The fact is that I am very very slow myself. I am more interested as a student of the sport, and aspire to one day coach at a high level.

I am, however, wanting to improve my own basic speed, though my long term goals are more distance oriented.

It has minimal benefit and may impede recovery from more worthwhile workouts.

Actually Clyde Harts methods have some significant advantages for a 400m runner. Done correctly and in context they are probably the most beneficial methods. One major advantage is the avoidance of overuse injuries. I would hunt out his YouTube talks.

I've experimented with various systems but Harts have been the most effective so far.

Hart has destroyed most if the athletes he's ever touched. He got lucky with MJ. He's a joke.

I think you may have extensive confused with intensive tempo. Extensive is at 70% as a recovery/oxygen system workout. Intensive is at 85%. No. Extensive aids in recovery from intensive, special endurance and speed workouts.

not training your speed impedes speed development.

SMTC wrote:

I think you may have extensive confused with intensive tempo. Extensive is at 70% as a recovery/oxygen system workout. Intensive is at 85%. No. Extensive aids in recovery from intensive, special endurance and speed workouts.

No, I understand the difference. I just am interested in the rationale behind them versus continuous aerobic tempo for sprinters. I understand that their duration is more event specific, but it doesn't seem like it would be any better in terms of aerobic development, running form or otherwise, and the sometimes high volumes of extensive tempo used by coaches takes a considerable amount of time when factoring in the recovery intervals, warm ups, cool downs, and drills. I am by no means an expert, but I have heard of many coaches having success with sprinters simply doing mobility exercises and drills on their "recovery" days.

But relating back to my OP, I was specifically wondering if it impedes max speed development in the same way that many claim continuous running does.

Extensive is aerobic capacity development.

Intensive is anaerobic capacity development.

If you try do do mostly special endurance to develop anaerobic capacity, it ends up creating a lot of lactate, which causes a lot of muscle damage, and increases recovery time. While you are waiting for this recovery, your ability to train acceleration is impacted (until the muscles are repaired), and it is the acceleration ability that mostly determines maxV. So many programs will do intensive tempo and acceleration concurrently in a cycle (Jamaicans, for example doing intensive tempo and heavy sleds).

Many people will start with extensive tempo, which will become intensive, and then special endurance as you get into better shape.

Clyde Hart coached many NCAA champions, in addition to Michael Johnson and Jeremy Wariner. There is not a better 400m coach in the country. But to you, somehow he's the worst coach.

coach d wrote:

Extensive is aerobic capacity development.

Intensive is anaerobic capacity development.

If you try do do mostly special endurance to develop anaerobic capacity, it ends up creating a lot of lactate, which causes a lot of muscle damage, and increases recovery time. While you are waiting for this recovery, your ability to train acceleration is impacted (until the muscles are repaired), and it is the acceleration ability that mostly determines maxV. So many programs will do intensive tempo and acceleration concurrently in a cycle (Jamaicans, for example doing intensive tempo and heavy sleds).

Many people will start with extensive tempo, which will become intensive, and then special endurance as you get into better shape.

Lots of lactate damages muscles? Complete and utter BS. You are clueless.

Wncmtnrnr I'm no genius, but 1/2 the top sprinters on earth so extensive tempo. So, why question it. On the other hand, the East Germans did do 20-40 minute runs, so choose your poison. Charlie Francis tempo allows you to perfect running form in a less then maximal environment. Those that say it doesn't are have never done it. You can try different arm and leg angle on every rep.

The designations "extensive" and "intensive" are arbitrary. A workout simply is what it is.

Is it bad to jog, bike, swim, or run around right after an ice bath?

SMTC wrote:

Wncmtnrnr I'm no genius, but 1/2 the top sprinters on earth so extensive tempo. So, why question it. On the other hand, the East Germans did do 20-40 minute runs, so choose your poison. Charlie Francis tempo allows you to perfect running form in a less then maximal environment. Those that say it doesn't are have never done it. You can try different arm and leg angle on every rep.

This is an idea I am very interested in. If someone mentally makes the effort to consciously maintain perfect form during tempo reps, will it carry over into 90%+ workouts?

I have also hear a lot of people claim distance runs kill speed because they teach the body to run slow, modify contractile properties of muscle fibers, and other reasons. Do these concerns not apply to work in the 65-80% range?

Jimson Lee has some good articles on the subject:

http://speedendurance.com/?s=tempo

I think the technique nuances I practice in tempo training definitely help top speed work.

East side wrote:

Is it bad to jog, bike, swim, or run around right after an ice bath?

Yes, unless you have a large bathroom.

SMTC: Do you believe it to be possible, or even seen firsthand, that a person could improve basic speed/VMax on a program like Hart's?

In his 400m sample base phase published by USATF, there is some sort of distance work 7 days a week, and alternating extensive and intensive tempo 5 consecutive days. The pattern continues into racing season, with moderately reduced volume of purely aerobic work. He claimed to have MJ even doing 20-30 mpw at a respectable clip in the fall, and even 2-4 mile fast tempo runs right up to the goal date meets.

I don't know anyone who has used Hart's system. I don't see any pure speed work in it, so I don't think your pure speed would increase. But, all of your endurance systems would.

I'm a 46 year old 400 runner. The most popular 400 program on charliefrancis.com is Mike Hurst(kitkat)'s program. I'm doing about 1/2 the volume of his gpp now.

http://speedendurance.com/2013/02/22/interview-mike-hurst-journalist-400m-coach/

http://media.speedendurance.com/Mike_Hurst_on_400m_training.pdf

The John Smith program in this article from Jimson Lee's speedendurance.com has produced ten times as many world class 400 runners than Hart's. It goes back to the 70's, when Jim Bush was the coach at UCLA. John trained under Charlie and uses his tempo methods.

I forgot to post the link: http://speedendurance.com/2009/10/06/400-meter-training-tips-from-bill-bowerman/