” date=”1259044127″]This argument will never end. Sure max strength is important to a point, but so are a lot of other qualities. Most of these max strength touting speed studies are always looking at acceleration runs and on athletes with probable suboptimal sprint technique (rugby, soccer, football, etc). After about 20m most, max-strength addicts get blown up by pansy boys like Jeremy Wariner anyway so what’s the big deal?
The point is, answering the question. You answered in the affirmative when you just said,”Sure max strength is important…”. Yes, there are other qualities, some more important than strength. But many of those qualities can’t be improved through training. Of the things that CAN be improved through training, is max strength important? I think you would agree, yes. Maybe even still not the most important, but important, at least for most of us not-so-genetically-gifted athletes. If you believe max strength plays absolutely no role, your training will be completely different when compared to someone who thinks max strength plays absolutely no role.
Even the Bondarchuk text claims no correlation between max strength and 100m+ speed.
Again, variables which completely dominate variability in overall populations can be completely masked when studying a smaller subset. Davan hates my basketball references, but here goes again. Overall, there is no question that height corrleates with performance in basketball. But if you look at just teams from a specific conference, or look at a specific league, even the NBA, the correlation between height and performance could be completely masked, or even show a negative correlation. If you just look at Olympic sprinters, you could get the same thing; no correlation or even a negative correlation. But if you compare Olympic sprintes to the general population, or even to sub-elite sprinters, Olympic sprinters will be statistically stronger overall. Not every single one, but that will be the trend.
So, its no surprise that the Bondarchuk statistics on elite athletes does not show a strong correlation with 100m performance. I think everyone here agrees that continued strength gains have diminishing returns as the sprinter’s performance improves, up to the point that additional strength may provide no additional benefits.
BUT, how many posters here asksing questions about strength workouts are already elite sprinters, or elite anything? Training to BECOME an elite athlete does not look exactly like the training OF an elite athlete. Some have a hard time understanding that simple idea.