and it doesn’t surprise me at all…if i am not mistaken they value jumps specific bounding, plyos, multi jumps and short approach jumping much more than speed work…
I totally agree as well. I think lots of speed work is totally redundant after a while….where as power levels seems to always increase with bounding work…
I have no problem taking out a speed day and adding another bounding day…
90+% of performance is determined and explained by approach speed…even in the slowest of jumpers. This is physics and undeniable. There’s really no way you can get around the positive effects on performance of increased speed…especially for long jumpers (where there’s only one takeoff). How many of the top long jumpers ever have been on bounding based programs (as opposed to speed based programs)?
Here’s the top 10 LJ performers of all time:
1 8.95 +0.3 Mike Powell
2 8.90A +2.0 Bob Beamon
3 8.87* -0.2 Carl Lewis
4 8.86A +1.9 Robert Emmiyan
5 8.74 +1.4 Larry Myricks
6 8.74A +2.0 Erick Walder
7 8.73 +1.2 Irving Saladino
8 8.71 +1.9 Iván Pedroso
9 8.66 +1.6 Louis Tsátoumas
10 8.63 +0.5 Kareem Streete-Thompson
I’ve highlighted the ones I know for a fact were in speed based programs. I don’t know enough about the training of the others to comment on them but between Powell and Lewis you get the bulk of the top 20 performances of all time. That’s at least 3 of the top 5 and likely 6+ of the top 10. Add in Dwight Phillips, Miguel Pate, John Moffit, Savante Stringfellow and current world leader Fabrice Lapierre as athletes using speed-focused training and it’s hard to deny the physics and results of pursuing even fractional increases in speed for a long jumper.