Just curious guys, the past few weeks I've done a weekly sprint session; be it hill sprints lasting 8 or so seconds 5-6 times, or flat sprints of up to 60m. After the hill sprints I usually run for 30 minutes at an easy pace; does this undermine the speed benefits I could get from a hill sprint workout? Do hill sprints develop pure speed (I've read before on here that they don't really do that)?
crossfit will improve your 5k time wrote:
Just curious guys, the past few weeks I've done a weekly sprint session; be it hill sprints lasting 8 or so seconds 5-6 times, or flat sprints of up to 60m. After the hill sprints I usually run for 30 minutes at an easy pace; does this undermine the speed benefits I could get from a hill sprint workout? Do hill sprints develop pure speed (I've read before on here that they don't really do that)?
No, it is the best way to do it (a shorter w/u, drills, some dynamic stretches, sprints, easy run). By the pure speed I think you mean maximal speed, which is trained on flat/track by up to 80m sprints, the hills are more like acceleration and specific strength training. I suggest to do a couple of 60-80m sprints on a flat ground after the hill sprints, to make your legs moving fast again, and to work on your max speed of course.
Yes, it absolutely undermines the goal of the workout. Easy running of any type undermines a goal of speed development. The question of course is by how much. I don't think there is a physiologist (or coach) on the planet who could honestly tell you exactly how much it undermines what you've done, but I think most would ambiguously say that it is meaningfully so. I'd look at it from a different perspective, though. How does your training benefit from doing a 30 minute cooldown as opposed to a 'normal' 15 minute one, or as opposed to 5-10 minutes of easy running and then some more speed/power oriented exercises like multi-jumps/multi-throws/plyos/bounding/lifting? If its because you want to get a 30 minute run in, why not do 2 sessions in the day, one speed, and one your 30+ minute run? By spacing them out you give your body time to more fully process each stimulus before giving it such a divergent new one.
Hill work is definitely more closely associated with acceleration mechanics than max velocity mechanics, but the two (accel and max v) are more closely intertwined than one session does one, and the other session works the other. Practically speaking, you can only reach max velocity through acceleration, and proper acceleration work isn't so much about about getting up to your top speed as quickly as possible as it is ensuring you fully accelerate to your true max velocity. Its also impossible to do max velocity work without that same rep being acceleration work. The benefit to hills is that you're able to spend an extended amount of time going through acceleration mechanics (7-8 seconds), since you're never able to get into max velocity mechanics on a hill, whereas around the 3-4s mark for a non-elite sprinter you're out of accel mechanics on a flat track.
JPS wrote:
How does your training benefit from doing a 30 minute cooldown as opposed to a 'normal' 15 minute one, or as opposed to 5-10 minutes of easy running and then some more speed/power oriented exercises like multi-jumps/multi-throws/plyos/bounding/lifting? If its because you want to get a 30 minute run in, why not do 2 sessions in the day, one speed, and one your 30+ minute run? By spacing them out you give your body time to more fully process each stimulus before giving it such a divergent new one.
Yes, if the OP would lift after the sprints, like I did in the past, then the 30min easy afterwards would be harmful. My routine was after the sprints, I went straight at home (I drowe) to do the strength work, and then run 15min usually on my treadmill.
But if he does not lift after the sprints, these two totally different activities (sprints+30min or so easy) can easily be combined, without any interruption to each other, unless maybe if you're a sprinter. Good points you make by the way.
JPS wrote:
Yes, it absolutely undermines the goal of the workout. Easy running of any type undermines a goal of speed development. The question of course is by how much. I don't think there is a physiologist (or coach) on the planet who could honestly tell you exactly how much it undermines what you've done, but I think most would ambiguously say that it is meaningfully so. I'd look at it from a different perspective, though. How does your training benefit from doing a 30 minute cooldown as opposed to a 'normal' 15 minute one, or as opposed to 5-10 minutes of easy running and then some more speed/power oriented exercises like multi-jumps/multi-throws/plyos/bounding/lifting? If its because you want to get a 30 minute run in, why not do 2 sessions in the day, one speed, and one your 30+ minute run? By spacing them out you give your body time to more fully process each stimulus before giving it such a divergent new one.
Hill work is definitely more closely associated with acceleration mechanics than max velocity mechanics, but the two (accel and max v) are more closely intertwined than one session does one, and the other session works the other. Practically speaking, you can only reach max velocity through acceleration, and proper acceleration work isn't so much about about getting up to your top speed as quickly as possible as it is ensuring you fully accelerate to your true max velocity. Its also impossible to do max velocity work without that same rep being acceleration work. The benefit to hills is that you're able to spend an extended amount of time going through acceleration mechanics (7-8 seconds), since you're never able to get into max velocity mechanics on a hill, whereas around the 3-4s mark for a non-elite sprinter you're out of accel mechanics on a flat track.
You need to lighten up a bit... the OP is not a sprinter and he is asking if a mere 30' jog (i assume to make the mileage quota for the day) is going to harm his speed session and the answer is NO....
8 second hill repeats. Lol.
Why don't you just stare at the hill for 8 seconds? Could be just as effective.
U.N.O. wrote:
JPS wrote:
How does your training benefit from doing a 30 minute cooldown as opposed to a 'normal' 15 minute one, or as opposed to 5-10 minutes of easy running and then some more speed/power oriented exercises like multi-jumps/multi-throws/plyos/bounding/lifting? If its because you want to get a 30 minute run in, why not do 2 sessions in the day, one speed, and one your 30+ minute run? By spacing them out you give your body time to more fully process each stimulus before giving it such a divergent new one.
Yes, if the OP would lift after the sprints, like I did in the past, then the 30min easy afterwards would be harmful. My routine was after the sprints, I went straight at home (I drowe) to do the strength work, and then run 15min usually on my treadmill.
But if he does not lift after the sprints, these two totally different activities (sprints+30min or so easy) can easily be combined, without any interruption to each other, unless maybe if you're a sprinter. Good points you make by the way.
You guys are on drugs. These are some whacked out answers.
8/10
Interesting thread. I don't have an opinion on this, but I have a question.
If some JPS and others are right that the 30 minute easy run immediately after would hinder the benefits of hill sprints, would the reverse also be true?
That is, could a runner do a 30 minute easy run followed by drills and then end the workout with several short hill sprints? I routinely do 15 minutes warm up jogging before any speed workout.
Live to run wrote:
You guys are on drugs. These are some whacked out answers.
Speaking of "whaked out", tell me, what's wrong with you? An emotionally balanced person would not throw comments like that, without any discussion about why you disagree, or just pretend to disagree in order to make someone feel bad. Well, kid, I don't feel bad at all, and I suggest some mental therapy to you, so that you could maybe be a better human being in the future :)
fisky wrote:
That is, could a runner do a 30 minute easy run followed by drills and then end the workout with several short hill sprints? I routinely do 15 minutes warm up jogging before any speed workout.
A well trained runner is more than ready to do the sprints after just 30min easy. Some may even benefit from a longer or more intense warm up to be able to recruit the fast twitches better. But I had no problems to sprint even in quite cold weather (sub zero, or even -10/-15 degrees), after only 1k easy followed by drills and dynamic stretching. Then I did 5 short relaxed uphill accelerations with a jog back recovery, took a couple of minutes rest and started the sprints.
Just do the sprints. Frequently. And keep in mind that you're not a sprinter, it's really not that complicated.
Your paranoid, moran.
The core of the issue wrote:
8 second hill repeats. Lol.
Why don't you just stare at the hill for 8 seconds? Could be just as effective.
8 second all out hill sprints is a staple for the Canova coached runners.
this thread cracks me up.
There are so many bad answers already on the first page. First off, no running is detrimental. Secondly, running sprints is not about muscle physiology, its about nueral response. running or jogging 30 minutes afterward doesnt affect the same body systems and surely wont affect the system that was worked when doing sprints.
U.N.O. wrote:
Yes, if the OP would lift after the sprints, like I did in the past, then the 30min easy afterwards would be harmful. My routine was after the sprints, I went straight at home (I drowe) to do the strength work, and then run 15min usually on my treadmill.
But if he does not lift after the sprints, these two totally different activities (sprints+30min or so easy) can easily be combined, without any interruption to each other, unless maybe if you're a sprinter. Good points you make by the way.
They certainly could be combined, in either example. As I said at first however, what does a runner have to gain by doing it this way? I definitely agree that it is worse to add the longer run the more speed/power work you do in a session, but being less bad isn't the same as being not bad at all.
To be clear (particularly to the ignorant 1-line respondents), I'm not suggesting this 30 minute cooldown somehow cancels out the work that was done with the sprints, If one wants to get the most out of the session however, they would do the minimum 'endurance work' required to be both completely warmed up, and properly cooled down from such a session.
As for the sentiment that someone might need to do 30 minutes in order to hit a mileage target (which I'm guessing is the driving force from the OP and respondents), I think people need to recognize how arbitrary such things can be. If you're looking to maximize the value of each mile you do, tacking on 15 minutes to a cooldown in this scenario is very low value added to your endurance training, while adding 15 minutes to a mid-week run or turning that 15 minutes into a 30 minute AM or PM run the same day as that sprint session would be very high value added options.
Usain Bolt used a motorized wheelchair everywhere he went when he wasn't sprinting so as to never undermine the efforts of workouts and racing.
Anything else is detrimental to pure speed and would sacrifice the gift.
Stay speedy my friends.
Bob Schul Country wrote:
this thread cracks me up.
There are so many bad answers already on the first page. First off, no running is detrimental. Secondly, running sprints is not about muscle physiology, its about nueral response. running or jogging 30 minutes afterward doesnt affect the same body systems and surely wont affect the system that was worked when doing sprints.
Who said it was about muscle physiology? Of course its primarily a neuromuscular training stimulus, but that doesn't change anything about the responses. By the logic that jogging 30 minutes doesn't affect the same body systems, why wouldn't we just do our sprints at the end of a weekly long run?
Any sub-maximal effort that isn't involved in warming up or cooling down from actual maximal efforts is detrimental to speed and power development. We can argue back and forth about the magnitude of the effects, but the core fact remains. The goal of one of these sessions is to teach the neuromuscular system to fire faster, more completely, and in its most effective order. A properly done sprint session is going to fatigue the neuromuscular system to a considerable degree. To then go on an extended, highly submaximal effort jog is preventing the nervous system from entering a resting state to synthesize the stimulus put on it, and is further sending mixed messages about the purpose of the actual session.
Hoveround Rep wrote:
Usain Bolt used a motorized wheelchair everywhere he went when he wasn't sprinting so as to never undermine the efforts of workouts and racing.
Anything else is detrimental to pure speed and would sacrifice the gift.
Stay speedy my friends.
Snarky as your response may be, Usain is on record as saying he's never run a full mile in his life.
JPS wrote:
Any sub-maximal effort that isn't involved in warming up or cooling down from actual maximal efforts is detrimental to speed and power development. A properly done sprint session is going to fatigue the neuromuscular system to a considerable degree. To then go on an extended, highly submaximal effort jog is preventing the nervous system from entering a resting state to synthesize the stimulus put on it, and is further sending mixed messages about the purpose of the actual session.
I believe that this is true, that jogging could interrupt the nervous system to optimally be able to synthesize the stimulus (sprints), because sprinters don't jog. But even in the 400m it is a mix of speed and endurance, and against the old thinking, the 800m is mainly aerobic (about 65%, depending of the athlete and pace), and after top speed efforts the CNS is still fatigued for up to ~10 days. Would that make a significant difference for a distance runner, to do the easy jog later on during the speed day (or even the day after), as you suggested: "...2 sessions in the day, one speed, and one your 30+ minute run? By spacing them out you give your body time to more fully process each stimulus before giving it such a divergent new one."
I understand that you didn't say that you will fully process the speed stimulus during the day, but does "more fully" make such a big difference? Besides, if you do the strength work after the sprints, it is also a bit different stimulus than alactic all out sprints, you can't lift weights as fast, and isn't nearly as event specific, compared to sprinting. It's even bigger difference if you are in a phase of general strength, instead of maximal or explosive (which isn't necessary for a distance runner in my opinion) strength. Isn't the body getting a different stimulus from the lifting too, interrupting the speed development from the sprints?
I think that the main goal of sprint training, for a distance runner, is simply to use your fast twitch muscle fibers frequently enough to not lose your speed (after you've reached the plateau, which is inevitable), among with other benefits from it. Another important, close to top speed training is to do longer (up to ~150m), anaerobic (glycolytic) capacity sprints with long recoveries throughout the base phase, especially for a MD runner, and then refine the anaerobic capacity into a good anaerobic power before the season. I just doubt that it (maximal speed development) has to be this complicated for a distance runner, even for a 800m runner. There's so much of FAST 800m runners from the past like Peter Snell, who did mostly easy-moderate mileage, it didn't harm his SPEED AT THE 800m. They knew nothing about sprint training during that time, compared to these days, but 1:44 at 800m, on a grass track is still very fast. Usually it's the other way around, too much speed/"quality", too little / imbalanced endurance work to be able to fully use your speed.
I understand your point, if speaking of optimal training for a sprinter. 100-200m are not mainly aerobic events. But when it comes to training of the 400m WR holder, Wayde Van Niekerk, he does some endurance training, and it hasn't harm his top speed that much...
"Coming from a 200m background, van Niekerk admits he dislikes endurance work. Yet killer sessions and reps of 800m and 1000m have proved vital for his improvement in 2015, though he describes them as “a drag and torture”.
-Running an 800m might take me two minutes, but it is then reassuring to know I’ll only need to run for 43 or 44 seconds for a 400m, he explains. -I know the training is going to help me for my 400m. As well as the physical benefits of this type of training, it has helped my mindset too.”
Actually it's the opposite, his top speed has improved, despite the endurance work:
2017 9.94 +0.9 Velenje 20 JUN
2016 9.98 +1.5 Bloemfontein 12 MAR
2011 10.48 +0.2 Germiston 04 APR
2017 19.84 +1.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 10 JUN
2016 20.02 +1.8 Durban (Kings Park) 26 JUN
2015 19.94 +0.6 Luzern 14 JUL
2014 20.19 +1.2 Lausanne (Pontaise) 03 JUL
2013 20.84 Pretoria 29 APR
2011 20.57 +1.4 Durban 10 APR
2010 21.02 +0.5 Moncton (Moncton Stadium) 23 JUL
I've believed a long time that the endurance training is greatly neglected aspect of 400m runners too. Maybe they afraid that they will lose their speed, or they don't understand how big part the aerobic system plays at the event.
Yes, you are going to be better off spending that 30 minutes going into the weight room and lifting heavy. Keep your hard days hard and your easy days easy. You can make up that 30 minutes of running doing an extra recovery run on another day.