Elitetrack: Sport Training & Conditioning

Let not over complicate this. Youcoach speed into the athlete by training speed at the appropriate timein the workout, using an appropriate method and dosage for the time ofthe training year. You train speed out by doing all sorts of generalnon specific work and slow “base building” type of work. Remember youare what you train to be! To be fast you must train fast. Look at University o
 
Continue reading…

I think I once read where C. Hart used to do alot of speed work with M.J.  They then went to a more strength based program because M.J. kept getting injured.

    There is no doubt speed is an important factor in training.  The proper time to insert speed, The correct dosage, The proper rest, etc.. Are all areas that warrant discussion. I'm not sure there is one proper answer that fits all situations, and circumstances. 
  If I was I would have stopped reading and researching years ago.

sprint400-
I disagree with your contention that all coaches use speed work…at least not in the strictest definition of the term (which is how it's typically used here). By speed work, Vern is referring to maximal effort high intensity running for short durations with complete or near complete rest. Under this definition, I think there are TONS of coaches who don't use speed work in their training.

Have to agree with Mike on this one.  I would even go so far as to say MOST coaches omit true speed work from their programs.  They just are not patient enough to allow full recovery between runs.

That's what I mean when I say coaches use some form of speed work. I agree true full out sprinting is not used by all coaches at all times of the year. My point is when a coach prescribes short hill runs, sprint drills, a lifting program where squats and various other lifts are used, even yoga to improve flexibility. All these things are designed to help improve speed development.

   Do they fit yours or the authors definition of speed work? Maybe not,  never the less they may be  pieces of the puzzle we call speed development.

 As to how many coaches use max speed work as to your or the authors definition, I have no idea and would not hazzard a guess. I mentioned C. Hart, he hasn't done to badly. I also know several people are now following his program with good results. So to say that coaches who don't use speed development  in a way that the  author defines it, are going to be beaten by those athletes that do use a year long speed development program is simply not true.

   There is nothing wrong with programs that emphasize max speed development all year long. I'm just pointing out that programs that gradually bleed max speed in to their programs are just as valid.

    I guess I take issue with dogmatism when it comes to coaching technique and the way one formulates a training program for an athlete. I have seen to many different yet very successfull programs , to assume there is only one way to coach speed or any other element of the total package we call the athlete. Athletes themselves will sometimes respond differently to the same program. We must learn to adapt to the athlete,and not make the athlete adapt to us and our idea of what is correct or incorrect.

   I have tried to learn as much about speed based programs, as well as strength based, and concurrent programs.
Knowing full well that all three work. This way when I have several athletes I can feel confident enough that we can reach our goals using any one of the programs based on what the athlete responds best to.

   How many different weight training programs have we seen for sprinters and athletes in general. All but a few  have validity, You experiment, research and pick the one you feel is the most appropriate for your athlete. This may change from year to year and athlete to athlete.

  My final question would be, who among us is still coaching with the exact same program  that we used when we started our career?

 A bit off point, but I also don't understand the Michigan vs Oregon comment. Is the Author trying to imply Michigan does not train their athletes for speed?

I certainly understand your point Coach.  Particularly with regard to speed development.  The variability of speed training in our situation does call for moderation in occurrence, duration and scale of intensification.  Many ways to improve the level of performance in that area, I guess.

So what are everyones thoughts on our jumps/sprints training right now since, clearly there is no speed training in it?(college)

2 days a week lifting upper body(1 day also long run 15-20 min)
2 days a week lifting lower(basically only squat)(1 day long run 15-20 min)

sprint400-
What you're doing is like going to China and telling everyone the Chinese dialect they are speaking is wrong. The term in question (speed development) is not my term, it is not Vern's term, it's not Barto's term. It is the widely recognized term that is used to describe maximal effort high intensity running for short durations with complete or near complete rest. Do squats help in the development of speed….sure, of course they do. So do plenty of other training modalities. Do they fit under the definition of the field-accepted term in question. No they do not. You can call a camel a cow all you want but don't tell other people their wrong if they are using the standard definition of the word. The main issue is the importance of using a common langauge. If you ignore the importance of speaking a common langauge then you're the one who's going to have a hard time understanding…not us. It seems like you're throwing a very wide net and taking everything under it as falling under speed development. Where do we stop? Does sleeping fall under speed development? Under your logic I could argue that it does because sleeping is important for hormal regulation, nervous system regeneration, and muscle repair….all of which play a part in training speed.

Mike, I totally accept yours and others definition of max speed training. I use the same terms. I guess we are not understanding each other. My problem with the original post ( and maybe I misinterpeted what the author was saying) Is that coaches who don't prescribe max speed training on a year round basis as part of their program  are not going to have the same degree of success as those that do.

     I reject that thought. I  then went on to state some of my reasons.

I'm a big believer in max speed training. I try to implement it into our own program,I also acknowledge that there are programs that use other methods and still have great results.

   I still don't get the Oregon vs  Michigan thing.

Michigan is HIT baby.  Possibly one of the reasons they are were awed by Appalachian State's speed.

Sorry to have added mud to the water.  I was commenting from the peanut gallery that regardless of when it is prescribed or in what density it is performed, many coaches in N. America still do NO true speed training.  I was not agreeing or disagreeing with Vern's original blog position.

As for Coach Hart's program, I believe too many people read his comments regarding what Jeremy, Sanya, or Michael have done and think they have the program down pat.  Believe me, the Baylor 4x100m will have done lots of speed work by the time the Big 12 meet rolls around.

sprint400 - 17 September 2007 08:47 AM

Mike, I totally accept yours and others definition of max speed training. I use the same terms. I guess we are not understanding each other. My problem with the original post ( and maybe I misinterpeted what the author was saying) Is that coaches who don't prescribe max speed training on a year round basis as part of their program  are not going to have the same degree of success as those that do.

     I reject that thought. I  then went on to state some of my reasons.

I'm a big believer in max speed training. I try to implement it into our own program,I also acknowledge that there are programs that use other methods and still have great results.

   I still don't get the Oregon vs  Michigan thing.

app state is hit to. lol univ of oregon has a great SC program and i know for a fact they do tons of real speed work.

Mortac and ut—sorry, but what do HIT and SC stand for?

high intensity training and strength&conditioning;

Thanks, Mortac.  But isn't "real" speed work (accels, maxV, etc) a form of HIT?  If so, why would Michigan HIT fall victim to App St speed? 

ex400 - 17 September 2007 10:54 AM

Thanks, Mortac.  But isn't "real" speed work (accels, maxV, etc) a form of HIT?  If so, why would Michigan HIT fall victim to App St speed? 

michigan dont believe in using free weights only machines, no squats only leg press 1-2sets to failure.  dont know much about there speed work but know they like stadium steps. and they also believe in eating tons of peanut butter sandwiches thats what there SC told me at there football in  hs.