[trackspeedboy]

trackspeedboy on July 10, 2009 at 11:53 am #15970

For the 100m only… whats the optimal distance to develop the specific race endurance.
150m seems to be alright, but what about 110m from the hurdles start line, with same race distribution/mechanics, etc. but just pushing out the maintenance phase by 10m.

[Miele-Scott]

Miele-Scott on August 19, 2009 at 4:31 am #87866

I’m not sure if there is one optimal distance.. but would not a distance that allows you to run 100m at top speed (or attempting to at least) be the best, with a slow acceleration into it. This would make the most sense to me at least.

[JeremyRichmond]

JeremyRichmond on August 19, 2009 at 10:20 am #87899

I think you should be trying to get into some anaerobic glycolysis (lactate) so recovery time is one variable to consider. Operating in such an uncomfortable zone demands the brain recruit muscles with more efficiency (better antagonist/agonist recruitment timing) as an added bonus. (Though I’m not knowledgeable in this area – just have a hunch)

I’m trying 120’s at the moment but emphasising running a bend for the last portions of it – in order to encourage asynchronous adaptation (short of taking a few inches off one leg). 3 minute recoveries. Might switch to shorter distances with shorter recoveries soon.

[Jay Turner]

Jay Turner on August 27, 2009 at 12:30 am #88425

When I think of anaerobic glycolysis, I think of anything under 8-10 seconds, usually with about 60 seconds recovery time. Is this what you mean?

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on August 27, 2009 at 12:41 am #88426

Standing 120s and flying 150s

[RussZHC]

RussZHC on August 27, 2009 at 1:03 am #88429

“Carl’s” 120s and 150s plus 70m (2 intermediate hurdle marks) or 80m (common track mark) repeats at less than full recovery (2x with incomplete then complete, then repeat) IMO would accomplish the same thing but maybe a bit more controlable

[JeremyRichmond]

JeremyRichmond on August 27, 2009 at 10:08 am #88445

When I think of anaerobic glycolysis, I think of anything under 8-10 seconds, usually with about 60 seconds recovery time. Is this what you mean?

I quoted 120’s with 3 minute recoveries (early season) but found that did not stress the anaerobic system the way it used to.
Generally any sprint work under 10 seconds is mainly using PCr system and therefore would not demand enough from snaerobic glycolysis to produce sufficient adaptation. However it depends on the length of recovery. PCr stores after a maximal sprint have a half-recovery time of 60-80s (Bogadanis et al.). Shorter sprints and short recovery will demand energy from anaerobic glycolysis and longer sprints with longer recovery will also do the same. One benefit of longer sprints is that the motor learning (efficient recruitment and activation of muscle) effects need many steps.
Last week I did fast-slow-fast over straight 70, 80 and 90m with 2 minute recovery and found that I ran out of PCr in the last portions of each sprint and maintained excellent quality sprints.

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 27, 2009 at 12:37 pm #88449

I’d be thinking about total volume run, and recovery time.

What about:

1) Accel (30-40m)
short recovery (ie – less than 1′)
2) 30-40m with a 20m run-in
2′ recovery
3) 40-50m with an easy 50m build up

Then a 5-10′ recovery and do it again x2-3

[Jay Turner]

Jay Turner on August 28, 2009 at 3:00 am #88478

I’d be thinking about total volume run, and recovery time.

What about:

1) Accel (30-40m)
short recovery (ie – less than 1′)
2) 30-40m with a 20m run-in
2′ recovery
3) 40-50m with an easy 50m build up

Then a 5-10′ recovery and do it again x2-3

Accel. work (30-40m) with short recovery (60 seconds or less) is what I was thinking. I even started another thread concerning this.

Could this work?