Kind of….that's more an ends-to-a-middle approach. Most of the time short to long starts out with mostly speed work (in fact, probably all speed work) and then goes into speed endurance work later.
Acc. Dev.—> MaxV—> Short Speed—> SE—> SE1—> SE2
Of course you'd still do speed work year-round, but it's more a blend of speed being trained to utilize for endurance.
If you wanna hit LA-Power before LA-Tolerance then yes. However, most people like to hit LA-T before power, as is the short-to-long way.
Looking back on the post, I need to make a correction. He still has an ends-to-middle approach (as he starts with short speed and long SE2), but the way I described is wrong….
Acc. Dev.—> MaxV—> Short Speed
Int. Tempo—> Splits/Depletions—> SE2—> SE1—> SE
It's still an ends-to-middle type approach, but instead of starting with SE2 you start with Int. Tempo and build from there. My mistake :(
Originally posted by 400Stud
If you wanna hit LA-Power before LA-Tolerance then yes. However, most people like to hit LA-T before power, as is the short-to-long way.
Looking back on the post, I need to make a correction. He still has an ends-to-middle approach (as he starts with short speed and long SE2), but the way I described is wrong….
Acc. Dev.—> MaxV—> Short Speed
Int. Tempo—> Splits/Depletions—> SE2—> SE1—> SE
It's still an ends-to-middle type approach, but instead of starting with SE2 you start with Int. Tempo and build from there. My mistake :(
Ok. That makes more sense to me. I prefer hitting LAT first, then lactic power. But this season I did it backwards. I had ok results, but I think I could have done better. (NOTE: I think you worded it wrong again, although I understood what you meant. You said SE1 and 2 comes before SE. But that's only if you prefer to go Lactic Power before LAT, correct? If you wanna go LAT first you go SE, then SE1 and SE2 right?)
If you choose not to do int. tempo, and skip straight to split runs/depeltions, is it still a short to long approach?
Yes, to hit LA-T first you would do that, however, you need to make sure the athlete took well to the speed work so that speed qualities are in place before attempting SE or else the other SE's will suffer.
If you choose not to do int. tempo, and skip straight to split runs/depeltions, is it still a short to long approach?
As long as you follow the order of operations after that.
I agree on CNS fatigue, my only argument is why would you want to run SE2 early (aka Lactic power work) when 1) you have little to no lactic tolerance and 2) you won't be able to hit decent times for awhile?
Originally posted by 400Stud
Yes, to hit LA-T first you would do that, however, you need to make sure the athlete took well to the speed work so that speed qualities are in place before attempting SE or else the other SE's will suffer.
If you choose not to do int. tempo, and skip straight to split runs/depeltions, is it still a short to long approach?
As long as you follow the order of operations after that.
What do you mean when you say "took well to the speed work"? Please explain.
They should be running fast, plain and simple. If you have a kid finish the previous season at 12.0 and start training the next season and after a couple mesos of speed work they haven't hit their current pr yet, they shouldn't move on to SE work seeing as how their speed qualities aren't in place yet.
I think I read somewhere that by the middle of a season an athlete should already be at or very near (+/- .2) their current pr's in order to reach new pr's, or something like that.
So in other words if you haven't hit your previous year's PR or at least gotten close to it then you need to continue with your speed work instead of moving on to SE because you have not taken well to it. Is this what you are saying?
IF the situation warrants it, wouldn't doing TOO MUCH speed work (I can't imagine how much one would have to do to be considered too much) make you peak too soon?
