Does Mike not prescribe many lifts in the 85% range and a substantial amount even over that?
For something like Olympic weightlifting using much under 85% many would consider a waste of time. That would be Bulgarians, Chinese, etc.
I assume you did not mean a weightlifter though.
Nothing against Mike but it doesn’t make it right or wrong. I prefer to keep ol’s in the 70-85% range. Please don’t use weightlifters/powerlifters as examples, we are sprinters!!!
I agree with both of these comments. Brooke speaks about the optimal method for an athlete to maximize strength training. UT correctly points out that sprinters have different goals, and while improving max strength is an important one, such a program can, for a sprinter, interfere with the primary goals of max speed, speed endurance etc., even if its just a matter of competing for limited training resources. As a result, compromises must be made. But when there is no such competition for resources, such as offseason or very early GPP, there may be no need to compromise your strength program.
My point through all of this thread has been that you shouldn’t ignore what ‘optimum strength training’, or at least our best understanding of it, actually consists of. If you design your ‘compromised strength training program for a sprinter’ based on another already ‘compromised strength training program’, you get farther and farther from what is optimal. Make adjustments, accept the necessary compromises, but don’t fool yourself into thinking that 3 x 10 @ 70%1RM at any volume is going to be as effective for building max strength as 5 x 2or3 @ 85-95%1RM even once per week.