After request for video we did some video of a session that demonstrated some key aspects of the proper use of sled training. Don’t be fooled by gurus that think that loading up a sled and pushing it is going to be the most effective way of using the tool as their own youtube clips prove they don’t understand speed. When doing sled work the key is to allow the athlete to improve acceleration mec
The Anti-Dope to Sled Abuse
-
-
Participant -
ParticipantBut why is this athlete using such short choppy strides…i dont work on this when i use the sled…i work on really extending my strides further right from the stride…i wouldnt say this athlete is developing sprinting power to an optimal level.
-
Participant
But why is this athlete using such short choppy strides…i dont work on this when i use the sled…i work on really extending my strides further right from the stride…i wouldnt say this athlete is developing sprinting power to an optimal level.
I am curious about the samething.
-
Participant
Awesome blog!!
To answer both UT and Nick’s question, I believe Carl addresses that in the third paragraph. The stride length should return to normal once the load is reduced. The concern is primarily with the shin angles and by prematurely extending the stride, the proper progression of the shin angles would not be preserved.
-
Participant
The reason athletes don’t open up, is that the sled they are pulling uses a harness to reduce air time by keeping the athlete down by virtually leashing them. Preventing excessive hinging of the knee will teach athletes to push back more, something that a load of near 10% of body mass will do.
-
Participant
the way i see it, is your push very hard while using a sled to extend your stride as much as you can while still accelerating…
I’ve found this transfers very well into having a large stride in normal sprinting and having a poweful push back on each stride.
-
Participant
Based on the rough export of the clip Nick I just don’t see your transfer.
The load we are using is to keep his strides cut a bit being a hurdler and we are focusing on his first 8 strides as he must keep them reduced. My pure sprinters use a lighter load closer to 8-10% instead of 10-12%. The point is look at the shin angles from the start and how the tibia doesn’t roll down like your video does. We need pushing with reduced ground contact times WHEN we sprint but allowing the athletes to feel comfortable and execute at 90% + speeds with 100% effort helps with acceleration. With more distance comes more air time that can allow for a foot swing. Also the shin angles are preserved to be more pushing.
Power in our program comes from the olympic lifts and speed work (sometimes plyos for pure sprinters).
EDIT: Working on stride length can be done from a combination of weight work, plyos, and coaching. I have had guys run in the 6.4s at 60m so the classic modes are not hindering things. Anything different than sprinting will compromise something in order to help something else.
-
Participant
lol…nice one…so now i dont have good stride length? my 43m 19 strides approach doesnt suggest that either right?
anyway…the way of using the sled you are suggesting is not what i am used to…is not what coaches back home do or other european coaches to that i have read/seen. Sled use is a great way of developing power…
i dont see the puspose of it if your not fully extending each stride and driving forward more more than your video shows…
-
Participant
I look at your 40m time, and, the way you accelerate Nick. I am following near 10% load and no less than 90% of a 30m base time of a 10.4 sprint (100m). We are working on shin position and he is a hurdler working on the first 13m. Look at our 40m times, stride technique at 10m sprints to judge after our sled protocol. I can get anyone to bound out but we are trying to accelerate nearly half a second faster than you do for 40m.
-
Participant
Lol…your as funny as most of your threads are…
Trust me you do not have anyone running 4.40 for 40m testing the way we did…
I have numbers of Greg Rutherfod with the same test and he isnt running anywhere close to 4.40 Electronic. And i am positive he is faster than your guys…
I am a long jumper not a sprinter…Chris Tomlinson runs only slightly faster than 4.80 with the same testing protocol and jumps 8.30 and 10.7 m/s on the runway…
who the hell cares about YOUR sprinters…
you beleive what you do…fine…but to start talking about MY speed is childish and completely off point but if it makes you feel better, im glad…
-
Participant
Nick, is it necessary to take everything personal? Whether or not you agree with his use of sleds, I think he has explained his purpose pretty clearly. I agree that it is different than what is done by most, but there is a historical basis for it if we look at guys like Dan Pfaff and Charlie Francis, who have both said they use a 10% principal with regard to sled loading and resultant speed.
-
Participant
What? When did i ever take it personal until he started talking about ME…i never made this about me…he did…
i said my opinion and that was it..
The people on this site are so rediculus sometimes…
-
Participant
i never said a word about 10% load…thats what i use also…
i made a comment on stride length…
-
Participant
Damn fellas simmer down, i can tell the season is near bc the t-levels are getting high. Hey Nick you need to cut the dhea. lol
-
Participant
dude seriously…thats a very stupid thing to say…joking or not.
-
Participant
im so lost how im getting the brunt of this…that dude valle started talking about me for no reason…implying shit about the way i run etc…my word, ru all serious?
-
Participant
the way i see it, is your push very hard while using a sled to extend your stride as much as you can while still accelerating…
I’ve found this transfers very well into having a large stride in normal sprinting and having a poweful push back on each stride.
this is what i said…nothing attacking, nothing personal…just my thoughts…
then he had check a video of me (like im the model for sprinting) what the fuck ? then you all say im to blame?
And, how many guys in the world have ever ran 6.4’s for the 60m? let me guess you coached all of them?
I have a blog on here which i can take off at any point i want to…for all of your enjoyment etc etc…kinda risky too though becuase im putting myself out there…
but im not the one putting up coaching blogs every other day promoting myself as a coach on a site that isnt even mine! so do not talk about me again.
And, its funny you talk about my acceration…i have ran 2.48 electronic for 20m, and 3.83 for 30m (differet protocol than the 20m test). I beleive Donavan Bailey the year he broke the 100m WR ran the 3.79??? doing the same test…clearly, as Mike has stated my accel ability is good.
-
Participant
Wow this is interesting….. You can have all the science on your side on how to train, etc, that doesn’t mean you’re going to run fast. First and foremost you have to believe in your own training and if you’re confident you’re probably going to run well. I think the 10% load is a good starting point. For me it would a 16 lb sled. I use 25lbs. I’ve run 10.30 doing it that and have pulled the sled faster than guys who weighed 220 lbs and ran a 6.40 55m. I think it’s good discussion, but I agree with Nick I use my sled to develop power and I use it early on in training and then again during my first few weeks of in season training.
-
Participant
Nick, why are you freaking out?
He posted the video and explained his reasoning.
You posted that you didn’t understand it and do something else and you have your reasoning for that. You said you have found it to transfer over, which Carl disagreed with in his post.
Carl clearly disagrees with your assertion that it transfers over and posted your video to support his beliefs. Whether or not it supports him or you or the boogie man is pretty much irrelevant–there was a reason why he posted it and it was not simply to insight a barrage of posts from you freaking out about him posting your video.
Carl posting a blog to promote himself? What services is he promoting and how much revenue do you think the blog on EliteTrack has generated for him? I suppose Mike even having this site is doing the same thing and Vern, who does not even contribute to the site outside of his blog posts that are automatically posted, is as well? Coaches get criticized for not posting enough… and when they do it is because they are looking to promote themselves? Come on now.
Carl had a guy that ran a 6.4 60m and ran at the Olympics. Does that make him the expert or a person with all of the secrets? Absolutely not. From talking to Carl, I believe the point was not to say that he knows better than you or anybody else, but to explain that there is a transference, from his experience, and that it can be and has been used successfully.
Now lay off the DHEA so we can spend more time reading your training log and less time trolling here.
-
Participant
To keep this somewhat on topic, I am going to argue Nick’s side here although I think both Nick and Carl are correct and incorrect as the goal of positive acceleration is to attain a higher velocity.
To achieve a higher velocity requires an overload on both components of velocity with respect to step length and rate. Stiffness and shin angles are all fine and dandy, but joint torsional stiffness in transfer applications has to take into account COM alterations by the added mass of the sled pull. The added mass in front because of application of force although the mass is behind. The friction of the surface you pull on is another factor that increases the load and the height of above the load also affect the magnitude of the load you are pulling. I don’t believe I am going out on a limb, but shin angle isn’t going to mean much with a front shifted COM as whole body vertical stiffness is reduced. Application of force is through COM to the center of pressure. The temporal-spatial problems associated with this type of training should be obvious as you may get correct shin angles, but you get incorrect feedback loops that if repeated enough present a problem of the athlete having proper shin angles but improper application of force which is now a learned habit.
For a proper acceleration to occur with a normal human gait pattern. Both the stride length and stride rate should increase with each successive step in initial acceleration (fast component). Once the fast component of acceleration is reached step rate drops and acceleration continues as long as stride length increases depending on stiffness (slow component). I don’t see this with Carl’s sprinter in terms of time durations of this happening although I would need to download the video and put it under intense scrutiny.
Refer to James Hay’s works on stride length and stride rate.
-
Participant
Damn, dhea keeps coming up. Am I missing something. I don’t even know what dhea is or what it does or if it’s an acronym.
-
Participant
To keep this somewhat on topic, I am going to argue Nick’s side here although I think both Nick and Carl are correct and incorrect as the goal of positive acceleration is to attain a higher velocity.
To achieve a higher velocity requires an overload on both components of velocity with respect to step length and rate. Stiffness and shin angles are all fine and dandy, but joint torsional stiffness in transfer applications has to take into account COM alterations by the added mass of the sled pull. The added mass in front because of application of force although the mass is behind. The friction of the surface you pull on is another factor that increases the load and the height of above the load also affect the magnitude of the load you are pulling. I don’t believe I am going out on a limb, but shin angle isn’t going to mean much with a front shifted COM as whole body vertical stiffness is reduced. Application of force is through COM to the center of pressure. The temporal-spatial problems associated with this type of training should be obvious as you may get correct shin angles, but you get incorrect feedback loops that if repeated enough present a problem of the athlete having proper shin angles but improper application of force which is now a learned habit.
For a proper acceleration to occur with a normal human gait pattern. Both the stride length and stride rate should increase with each successive step in initial acceleration (fast component). Once the fast component of acceleration is reached step rate drops and acceleration continues as long as stride length increases depending on stiffness (slow component). I don’t see this with Carl’s sprinter in terms of time durations of this happening although I would need to download the video and put it under intense scrutiny.
Refer to James Hay’s works on stride length and stride rate.
DBandre,
Could you post some video for us to see the difference. Most of us are visual and it would be nice to see what you do with the above details.
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229485661"]To keep this somewhat on topic, I am going to argue Nick’s side here although I think both Nick and Carl are correct and incorrect as the goal of positive acceleration is to attain a higher velocity.
To achieve a higher velocity requires an overload on both components of velocity with respect to step length and rate. Stiffness and shin angles are all fine and dandy, but joint torsional stiffness in transfer applications has to take into account COM alterations by the added mass of the sled pull. The added mass in front because of application of force although the mass is behind. The friction of the surface you pull on is another factor that increases the load and the height of above the load also affect the magnitude of the load you are pulling. I don’t believe I am going out on a limb, but shin angle isn’t going to mean much with a front shifted COM as whole body vertical stiffness is reduced. Application of force is through COM to the center of pressure. The temporal-spatial problems associated with this type of training should be obvious as you may get correct shin angles, but you get incorrect feedback loops that if repeated enough present a problem of the athlete having proper shin angles but improper application of force which is now a learned habit.
For a proper acceleration to occur with a normal human gait pattern. Both the stride length and stride rate should increase with each successive step in initial acceleration (fast component). Once the fast component of acceleration is reached step rate drops and acceleration continues as long as stride length increases depending on stiffness (slow component). I don’t see this with Carl’s sprinter in terms of time durations of this happening although I would need to download the video and put it under intense scrutiny.
Refer to James Hay’s works on stride length and stride rate.
DBandre,
Could you post some video for us to see the difference. Most of us are visual and it would be nice to see what you do with the above details.[/quote]
Carl:
I’ll find something that helps cross the action-language bridge. As for joint torsional stiffness and possible applications, I think you’ll find Farley, Devita, and McCaw as the best references.
-
Participant
“The video above is an example of stiffness at the ankle joint. While the left foot drops a little (something we identified and are working on) the right foot seemingly sticks on landing and allows the legs to push.”
Carl:
So here is my question: In reference to the above quote about your athlete’s left foot dropping, what are some of the means you are utilizing to help fix the premature drop?
-
Participant
DB can you please post vid?
What you are saying seems to support not using any resistance in sprint training. Stating that increasing stride length and frequency is going to create acceleration is pretty obvious and I doubt is going to be disputed. What is being disputed and discussed is which method(s) are going to create the best transference (and perhaps, which are best in certain situations). Without a video to understand what your point is on relation to THIS, it’s difficult to really advance the discussion in any way.
-
Participant
DB can you please post vid?
What you are saying seems to support not using any resistance in sprint training. Stating that increasing stride length and frequency is going to create acceleration is pretty obvious and I doubt is going to be disputed. What is being disputed and discussed is which method(s) are going to create the best transference (and perhaps, which are best in certain situations). Without a video to understand what your point is on relation to THIS, it’s difficult to really advance the discussion in any way.
Davan:
No it’s not. If Carl’s athlete acceleration pattern doesn’t match this which it doesn’t seem to do after the first 5 or 6 steps. Then stiffness is compromised especially if the stride is rate adjusted instead of stiffness adjusted for increased acceleration. This happens because we go from zero stiffness in the blocks to maximum stiffness at max velocity.
The use of sleds is to alter the stimulus for acceleration. It has it’s purposes especially for those who have the trouble of standing up. The best possible use of sleds is pulling them no longer 5-15m and have the force of the pulling the sled below the original center of mass. This forces the athlete to use more strength with decreased stiffness.
Acceleration is about pushing therefore I would say Nick’s suggestion about longer strides is correct in what you want in the outcome, but it has the flaw of being somewhat misleading as your steps should be shortened while pulling a sled, but it is more inline with improving the initial impulse. This is were the increased step rate of Carl’s athlete shows what should happen when pushing a larger mass is the best way to accelerate the added load.
Therefore a video shows nothing, but a series of photos showing a sled pull layered on top of a regular acceleration at ground contact at the same step should show you what is needed.
-
Participant
i contacted 2 trusted sources of mine…one an olympic gold medalist coach and the other the biomachanist for UKA…also browsing through some litt i have…
all said of sleds, primary purpose is to develop explosive power and stride length…
my opinion has been backed up enough…so to fire at me like that was stupid.
-
Participant
Nick your post just shows how you misunderstood what Carl was saying. Whether or not certain protocols are appropriate or not are up for debate, but your understanding of the issue is clearly in question. Improving “stride length” and “explosive power” does not simply mean you volitionally extend your leg more.
DB–I will say once again post vid. Volitionally extending your leg more doesn’t automatically ensure better (as in faster) acceleration with a sled as it is going to lead to significantly longer GCTs and will have a different acceleration pattern than if you go with the way Carl’s athlete is doing it. It is also likely that you are going to get a significant tibial roll because of this forced extension and proceeding strides, which is something you definitely DO NOT want in flat out sprinting and acceleration.
Now again, which method has better transference to flat sprinting, I am not sure and I can see and understand arguments for both.
-
Participant
Ok, and im saying that having that guy running the way he was won’t improve these 2 areas that much. i didnt even read the post…just commented on the video.
-
Participant
Nick your post just shows how you misunderstood what Carl was saying. Whether or not certain protocols are appropriate or not are up for debate, but your understanding of the issue is clearly in question. Improving “stride length” and “explosive power” does not simply mean you volitionally extend your leg more.
DB–I will say once again post vid. Volitionally extending your leg more doesn’t automatically ensure better (as in faster) acceleration with a sled as it is going to lead to significantly longer GCTs and will have a different acceleration pattern than if you go with the way Carl’s athlete is doing it. It is also likely that you are going to get a significant tibial roll because of this forced extension and proceeding strides, which is something you definitely DO NOT want in flat out sprinting and acceleration.
Now again, which method has better transference to flat sprinting, I am not sure and I can see and understand arguments for both.
First off Davan bring your “A” game next time please. I said the best way to accelerate a heavier load is this “This is were the increased step rate of Carl’s athlete shows what should happen when pushing a larger mass is the best way to accelerate the added load.” The natural response is to increase stride rate, it’s like a car climbing Loveland Pass or cyclists switching to lower a gear to go up a mountain. Carl and Nick are on two different wavelengths here, Nick is discussing the response to training and Carl’s discussing what’s going on, but both are slightly wrong to begin with. There is no video needed, just a couple of photographs of sled pulling at foot contact #’s x,y,z and during a normal acceleration at foot contact #’s x,y,z. Something I likely don’t have on videotape.
I did not discuss volitional extension in this thread. Sled pulling reduces stiffness with respect to the normal COM with a faster step rate from initial acceleration (first step) and this produces a temporal-spatial problem that if sled pulling is used exclusively for acceleration we end up with an athlete who looks like they are pulling a sled when accelerating. If they look like they are pulling a sled, this is due to the altered COM position with respect to center of pressure in sled pulling. Hence there is little motor learning transfer to normal unloaded acceleration in terms of shin angles and stiffness. That’s the part which concerns me about Carl’s comments although his athlete does what is natural for about 4 or 5 steps most likely, also if his athlete is not increasing stride length and only stride to accelerate we have a problem and if stride rate doesn’t down regulate after 3-4s we have another problem. As far as Nick’s comments go, the ultimate outcome from all of this is apply a larger initial impulse at the beginning of acceleration which will require a slightly higher step rate that is more forceful which should produce longer steps in the acceleration pattern. However, the method of training this way will exhibit a shortened step length as opposed to a longer one while using sleds. This is why both are correct and incorrect and the goal should be not to alter what should happen naturally in acceleration, but enhance it.
-
Participant
Carl:
How long was this pull?
-
Participant
“The video above is an example of stiffness at the ankle joint. While the left foot drops a little (something we identified and are working on) the right foot seemingly sticks on landing and allows the legs to push.”
Carl:
So here is my question: In reference to the above quote about your athlete’s left foot dropping, what are some of the means you are utilizing to help fix the premature drop?
I will post more later on the subject.
-
Participant
No, video is important because it isn’t just about foot positions, COM, etc., but also about GCTs and other factors.
Further, Carl focused on ankle stiffness in his post. You continue to just say stiffness and refer to overall leg stiffness, which is an important difference as it relates to what Carl says he is targeting by doing the drill in this fashion.
You then go on to post some nonsense about how this is bad if a person uses this as their sole or main mean of improving acceleration–I hope you weren’t serious when you posted that. I am not aware of anybody that uses the sled as their primary means of improving acceleration.
I’ll ask once again, like in the thread on cleans, to post vid. Your comments need some back-up with video because what you are saying is either unclear or isn’t phrased in a way that has a clear application. Not saying you need to post some 6.3-6.4 60m sprinter or something, just one of your high school athletes doing what you would consider a solid job on how to do this particular drill. It would make what is being discussed much clearer.
-
Participant
No, video is important because it isn’t just about foot positions, COM, etc., but also about GCTs and other factors.
Further, Carl focused on ankle stiffness in his post. You continue to just say stiffness and refer to overall leg stiffness, which is an important difference as it relates to what Carl says he is targeting by doing the drill in this fashion.
You then go on to post some nonsense about how this is bad if a person uses this as their sole or main mean of improving acceleration–I hope you weren’t serious when you posted that. I am not aware of anybody that uses the sled as their primary means of improving acceleration.
I’ll ask once again, like in the thread on cleans, to post vid. Your comments need some back-up with video because what you are saying is either unclear or isn’t phrased in a way that has a clear application. Not saying you need to post some 6.3-6.4 60m sprinter or something, just one of your high school athletes doing what you would consider a solid job on how to do this particular drill. It would make what is being discussed much clearer.
I gave author references for joint torsional stiffness for people to refer to. You can make the links there or you can refer to my website were I talk about the subject of angles using all three authors (Farley, Devita, and McCaw) I referenced. You could go further and link it to research of other authors and come to the same conclusion that stiffness is going to be reduced, it has to be, and the issue isn’t volitional extension here it’s flexion since when we are measuring stiffness we essentially discussing flexion at the ankle, knee, and hip at ground contact which correspond directly to leg stiffness and vertical stiffness and since the added mass is causing resistive forces against the line of pull and not gravitational forces normally associated with added loading. It’s kind of like running into a 20mph wind or greater that crosses the body at angle in the saggital plane.
As the sole training purpose we’d see why sled pulling has little transference in motor learning of unloaded accelerations and yes there are coaches who only do sled pulling, hill running or other means as acceleration training.
I said I would figure out how to post something to Carl’s request. As for your request of video, what good will that do? It doesn’t end the debate, it may only worsen the debate, if you need a video reference just pay attention to Carl’s athlete’s first 7 steps only in the video. Myself posting a video of a 14+s female sprinters pulling a non-weighted 15lb sled is virtually worthless, not to mention I might have 2 video segments at most or none at all in about 120 hours of tape to go through. I put them in sleds to develop the initial impulse and I am not sure it worked better than the slight inclines we used. I highly doubt I have any on my digitized copies as those are all mostly competitions, tests, and assorted exercise sequences and demonstrations I wanted for reference of which sled pulling is not one of them.
-
Participant
Carl:
Was this sled pull about getting your athlete to the hurdle in 7 steps?
-
Member
one of my favorite quotes…
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough” – Albert Einstein
the sled work was to help keep the leg from swinging during the last couple strides to the hurdle.
strides 1-5 are usually decent, and then there is a drastic change from 6-8 in where i almost over stride.
this is a big no-no when trying to sprint-hurdle.
we did this sled work after a sprint day and i feel it helped.
i dont know the science behind it all and i honestly dont care to get into it but i know it helped me keep driving those last couple steps into the hurdle and that was the point of the drill.
the drill was run approx 20 meters and i did a total of 4 runs, 2 of which were taped and viewed by you guys.
my start is still not where we feel it should be, but it is better, and i look forward to doing the drill again as i feel it helped.
if you guys would like i can post before and after so you can see the difference that it has made so far. once again its not perfect but progress is being made..
-
Participant
one of my favorite quotes…
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough” – Albert Einstein
the sled work was to help keep the leg from swinging during the last couple strides to the hurdle.
strides 1-5 are usually decent, and then there is a drastic change from 6-8 in where i almost over stride.
this is a big no-no when trying to sprint-hurdle.
we did this sled work after a sprint day and i feel it helped.
i dont know the science behind it all and i honestly dont care to get into it but i know it helped me keep driving those last couple steps into the hurdle and that was the point of the drill.
the drill was run approx 20 meters and i did a total of 4 runs, 2 of which were taped and viewed by you guys.
my start is still not where we feel it should be, but it is better, and i look forward to doing the drill again as i feel it helped.
if you guys would like i can post before and after so you can see the difference that it has made so far. once again its not perfect but progress is being made..
So it is a drill for approaching the first hurdle? That changes the rationale and it’s possible application. The first three hurdles are normally the keys to a race, but what happens at the first can directly affected the rest of the race and I guess Carl’s trying to develop a consistent stride pattern. The only problem I can see with the sled pulls for this is you cannot enter visual guidance that occurs in obstacle negotiation into the equation. It’s interesting although I want to hear more about it.
Like I said, I don’t think stiffness and force application are the same in pulling sleds as unloaded acceleration drills and the transference in this department is not something you would want. That’s my only crux with Carl’s take. Everything else, 20m sled pulls, stride rate, your first 7 or so steps pulling are fine. I am a bit concerned with your steps beyond that 5-6-7th step.
-
Participant
one of my favorite quotes…
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough” – Albert Einstein
Einstein or Schroedinger said (in regards to Quantum physics) “if it doesn’t confuse you then you haven’t understood it properly”
Being the Grinch…
Resisted sprint training is no more effective than sprint training itself – Spinks et al 2007 JSCR 21(1), 77-85
Looking over the data with a fine tooth comb, I might suggest that it may improve sprint performance a little better than sprint training between 8-15m from the start line.
-
Participant
[quote author="davan" date="1229512930"]No, video is important because it isn’t just about foot positions, COM, etc., but also about GCTs and other factors.
Further, Carl focused on ankle stiffness in his post. You continue to just say stiffness and refer to overall leg stiffness, which is an important difference as it relates to what Carl says he is targeting by doing the drill in this fashion.
You then go on to post some nonsense about how this is bad if a person uses this as their sole or main mean of improving acceleration–I hope you weren’t serious when you posted that. I am not aware of anybody that uses the sled as their primary means of improving acceleration.
I’ll ask once again, like in the thread on cleans, to post vid. Your comments need some back-up with video because what you are saying is either unclear or isn’t phrased in a way that has a clear application. Not saying you need to post some 6.3-6.4 60m sprinter or something, just one of your high school athletes doing what you would consider a solid job on how to do this particular drill. It would make what is being discussed much clearer.
I gave author references for joint torsional stiffness for people to refer to. You can make the links there or you can refer to my website were I talk about the subject of angles using all three authors (Farley, Devita, and McCaw) I referenced. You could go further and link it to research of other authors and come to the same conclusion that stiffness is going to be reduced, it has to be, and the issue isn’t volitional extension here it’s flexion since when we are measuring stiffness we essentially discussing flexion at the ankle, knee, and hip at ground contact which correspond directly to leg stiffness and vertical stiffness and since the added mass is causing resistive forces against the line of pull and not gravitational forces normally associated with added loading. It’s kind of like running into a 20mph wind or greater that crosses the body at angle in the saggital plane. [/quote] You are arguing things that weren’t even being debated.
As the sole training purpose we’d see why sled pulling has little transference in motor learning of unloaded accelerations and yes there are coaches who only do sled pulling, hill running or other means as acceleration training.
That is not what we are discussing though. Saying this kind of detracts considering Carl and his athlete (and numerous other people) have explained that this is a drill that makes up a very small portion of their training and is in addition TO sprinting.
I said I would figure out how to post something to Carl’s request. As for your request of video, what good will that do? It doesn’t end the debate, it may only worsen the debate, if you need a video reference just pay attention to Carl’s athlete’s first 7 steps only in the video. Myself posting a video of a 14+s female sprinters pulling a non-weighted 15lb sled is virtually worthless, not to mention I might have 2 video segments at most or none at all in about 120 hours of tape to go through. I put them in sleds to develop the initial impulse and I am not sure it worked better than the slight inclines we used. I highly doubt I have any on my digitized copies as those are all mostly competitions, tests, and assorted exercise sequences and demonstrations I wanted for reference of which sled pulling is not one of them.
I’m not concerned about how fast they’re going–if they’re doing the drill correctly in what you define as the proper way to do it, I am interested in seeing it. I want to see if doing it your way also has no tibial rolling, over striding, and has optimal stiffness at specific shin angles.
-
Participant
I thought Nicks vid is a testing vid and hence out of bounds for form critiques? 😛
one of my favorite quotes…
“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough” – Albert Einstein
the sled work was to help keep the leg from swinging during the last couple strides to the hurdle.
strides 1-5 are usually decent, and then there is a drastic change from 6-8 in where i almost over stride.
this is a big no-no when trying to sprint-hurdle.
Do you mean youre overstriding in general or just in the sled vid? Im new to hurdle analysis so I hope thats not a stupid question. If you have video pointing out where youre almost overstriding, Id like to see it.
if you guys would like i can post before and after so you can see the difference that it has made so far. once again its not perfect but progress is being made..
I would love to see this. PM if you want.
Also, dbandre, do you have the photo sequence that youre talking about that is better than video because I think I understand what youre trying to say, but I need visuals since this isnt my primary sport.
-
Member
here are some still shots of what i was doing
this is the 7th stride to the first hurdle
the 8th stride (cut-step)and now here is what one of the best hurdlers in the world looks like on his approach to the first hurdle. this is Ladji Doucoure who is the 2005 World Champ and has a PR of 12.97 and 7.42 in the 60hurdles
ladji on his 7th stride
Ladji on his 8th (cut step)as you can see Ladji does not have the “swing” action that my last strides have. His feet land beneath him and he loses no speed going into the first hurdle.
I on the other hand “swing” my leg which causes me to be closer to the hurdle on both strides and causes me to lose speed (something like .01/2 seconds per stride)
the goal of the drill is to get my strides to not have the “swing” action and to get them to stay underneath my body.
After doing the drill the following practice session looked better, obviously still not perfect but there was improvement. In may last meet there was even more improvement but the camera angles are a bit off so i cant take still shots.
anyways in the sprint hurdle event you do not want this “swing” action on the approach to the first hurdle. YES many athletes do it, but that does not mean it is ideal. There coaches havent addressed this issue and so that is their fault. Some athletes run great times with this flaw in their technique but i dont have the talent to run fast with these kinds of flaws. so that is why we are addressing it.
whether you feel this drill works or not it does not matter. I am proof that it does work and thats really all we care about.
there are a million and one drills out there you can do and you can ALWAYS justify why they work or do not work. this is no different. so long as you get results it really shouldnt matter.
-sorry for the shitty still shots
-
Participant
I am interested to understand how others will challenge/refute Carl’s video with some of their own.
Since the sled alters the COM of the athlete, where is the athlete striking? If the athlete is striking at a point underneath the body, it would be an over stride and the tibia is rolling down. The COM is behind the athlete’s body due to the 10% weight + friction of the sled.
I could see Dbandre’s points if the athlete were to wear a weighted vest, it would allow for closer to normal ground mechanics and the athlete could achieve sequential striking patterns with increased stiffness.
-
Member
I could see Dbandre’s points if the athlete were to wear a weighted vest, it would allow for closer to normal ground mechanics and the athlete could achieve sequential striking patterns with increased stiffness.
we are not looking to get “normal” ground contact.
that is the problem in the first place. NORMAL for me means FLAWED. and that is what we are trying to fix with this drill.
what is the point of a drill if you are just going to continue to make the same mistakes? the drill is to fix what we see in our “normal” running as flaws.
-
Participant
[quote author="Chad Williams" date="1229558295"]I could see Dbandre’s points if the athlete were to wear a weighted vest, it would allow for closer to normal ground mechanics and the athlete could achieve sequential striking patterns with increased stiffness.
we are not looking to get “normal” ground contact.
that is the problem in the first place. NORMAL for me means FLAWED. and that is what we are trying to fix with this drill.
what is the point of a drill if you are just going to continue to make the same mistakes? the drill is to fix what we see in our “normal” running as flaws.[/quote]
Whose side are you arguing? Which drill are you referencing? What flaws are you trying to fix?
-
Member
im referring to the video and that fine stud of an athlete who is in it. he looks like a beast!!
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229514892"][quote author="davan" date="1229512930"]No, video is important because it isn’t just about foot positions, COM, etc., but also about GCTs and other factors.
Further, Carl focused on ankle stiffness in his post. You continue to just say stiffness and refer to overall leg stiffness, which is an important difference as it relates to what Carl says he is targeting by doing the drill in this fashion.
You then go on to post some nonsense about how this is bad if a person uses this as their sole or main mean of improving acceleration–I hope you weren’t serious when you posted that. I am not aware of anybody that uses the sled as their primary means of improving acceleration.
I’ll ask once again, like in the thread on cleans, to post vid. Your comments need some back-up with video because what you are saying is either unclear or isn’t phrased in a way that has a clear application. Not saying you need to post some 6.3-6.4 60m sprinter or something, just one of your high school athletes doing what you would consider a solid job on how to do this particular drill. It would make what is being discussed much clearer.
I gave author references for joint torsional stiffness for people to refer to. You can make the links there or you can refer to my website were I talk about the subject of angles using all three authors (Farley, Devita, and McCaw) I referenced. You could go further and link it to research of other authors and come to the same conclusion that stiffness is going to be reduced, it has to be, and the issue isn’t volitional extension here it’s flexion since when we are measuring stiffness we essentially discussing flexion at the ankle, knee, and hip at ground contact which correspond directly to leg stiffness and vertical stiffness and since the added mass is causing resistive forces against the line of pull and not gravitational forces normally associated with added loading. It’s kind of like running into a 20mph wind or greater that crosses the body at angle in the saggital plane. [/quote] You are arguing things that weren’t even being debated.
As the sole training purpose we’d see why sled pulling has little transference in motor learning of unloaded accelerations and yes there are coaches who only do sled pulling, hill running or other means as acceleration training.
That is not what we are discussing though. Saying this kind of detracts considering Carl and his athlete (and numerous other people) have explained that this is a drill that makes up a very small portion of their training and is in addition TO sprinting.
I said I would figure out how to post something to Carl’s request. As for your request of video, what good will that do? It doesn’t end the debate, it may only worsen the debate, if you need a video reference just pay attention to Carl’s athlete’s first 7 steps only in the video. Myself posting a video of a 14+s female sprinters pulling a non-weighted 15lb sled is virtually worthless, not to mention I might have 2 video segments at most or none at all in about 120 hours of tape to go through. I put them in sleds to develop the initial impulse and I am not sure it worked better than the slight inclines we used. I highly doubt I have any on my digitized copies as those are all mostly competitions, tests, and assorted exercise sequences and demonstrations I wanted for reference of which sled pulling is not one of them.
I’m not concerned about how fast they’re going–if they’re doing the drill correctly in what you define as the proper way to do it, I am interested in seeing it. I want to see if doing it your way also has no tibial rolling, over striding, and has optimal stiffness at specific shin angles.[/quote]
Everything I discussed is related davan if you believe it or not. The transference that will happen will not be seen in shin angles, but in relative positioning of the COM like what is done in a sled pulling drill and this creates a gap in temporal-spatial awareness. So I don’t believe the transference which Carl wants will happen. The references I gave will let your learn to start collecting the dots on why this may not be the best way to achieve what Carl is wanting to achieve. The total package of training is what matters in the long run and what we have here is a slice of that training, to judge overall benefits the total package has to come into play and this is an unknown.
I also did not bring this drill being the “end all” you did. I said looking at the differences between sled pulling and unloaded will give you the reasons why transference the transference is not what you would likely want. This is the cornerstone in the building holding his public debate. The transference is in ability to generate a greater impulse at the start. That’s the overload stimulus here. The effectiveness of sled pulling in transference to the actual skill of acceleration out of the blocks diminishes the more steps you take with the sled. It’s similar to a falling start in unloaded acceleration drills which doesn’t have much usefulness past 15-20m except if you did them in conjuction with fly’s. I think if a coach did these loaded acceleration drills before any other acceleration work they would see greater transference to the unloaded skill in the seasonal training plan, however I don’t believe they would find them to be of much benefit as season wears on.
This last piece were speed doesn’t matter is flawed, speed does matter and speed is related to stiffness and acceleration capabilities. Doing the drill correctly isn’t about tibial roll per se, but about accelerating the sled as fast as possible. Trying to determine stiffness in sled pulling on each contact would be a monumental task in and of itself and the only references would be shin angles and velocity at each ground contact. So what you’d look for is a larger step distance as I originally stated! If that happens then you are generating a greater initial impulse, greater stiffness, etc…
-
Participant
I am interested to understand how others will challenge/refute Carl’s video with some of their own.
Since the sled alters the COM of the athlete, where is the athlete striking? If the athlete is striking at a point underneath the body, it would be an over stride and the tibia is rolling down. The COM is behind the athlete’s body due to the 10% weight + friction of the sled.
I could see Dbandre’s points if the athlete were to wear a weighted vest, it would allow for closer to normal ground mechanics and the athlete could achieve sequential striking patterns with increased stiffness.
Chad:
I don’t know if stiffness will be increased, but I think weighted vests would be better as long as the added mass is strapped securely around the body and not just at the shoulders. This is the same contention I have about the sled pulls, because the point of origin on force exertion is not back at the sled but at the center of pressure in the line of pull which in this case is in front of the athlete. The amount force required is determined by height above the sled and friction of the sled as well as the weight of the sled.
I am not trying to challenge Carl’s video as the stimulus requirement as I see it is met in the first seven or so steps, unlike it is in the “Dos” Videos. I am just challenging his justification and the possible transference benefits because I just don’t see it.
BTW: On America’s biggest loser they showed the second place finisher pulling a tractor, he must have hired “Dos”.
-
Participant
here are some still shots of what i was doing
[IMG]https://i42.tinypic.com/ej9aiv.jpg[/IMG]
this is the 7th stride to the first hurdle[IMG]https://i42.tinypic.com/2up3ak1.jpg[/IMG]
the 8th stride (cut-step)and now here is what one of the best hurdlers in the world looks like on his approach to the first hurdle. this is Ladji Doucoure who is the 2005 World Champ and has a PR of 12.97 and 7.42 in the 60hurdles
[IMG]https://i40.tinypic.com/29bg09c.jpg[/IMG]
ladji on his 7th stride[IMG]https://i39.tinypic.com/2hxvlhh.jpg[/IMG]
Ladji on his 8th (cut step)as you can see Ladji does not have the “swing” action that my last strides have. His feet land beneath him and he loses no speed going into the first hurdle.
I on the other hand “swing” my leg which causes me to be closer to the hurdle on both strides and causes me to lose speed (something like .01/2 seconds per stride)
the goal of the drill is to get my strides to not have the “swing” action and to get them to stay underneath my body.
After doing the drill the following practice session looked better, obviously still not perfect but there was improvement. In may last meet there was even more improvement but the camera angles are a bit off so i cant take still shots.
anyways in the sprint hurdle event you do not want this “swing” action on the approach to the first hurdle. YES many athletes do it, but that does not mean it is ideal. There coaches havent addressed this issue and so that is their fault. Some athletes run great times with this flaw in their technique but i dont have the talent to run fast with these kinds of flaws. so that is why we are addressing it.
whether you feel this drill works or not it does not matter. I am proof that it does work and thats really all we care about.
there are a million and one drills out there you can do and you can ALWAYS justify why they work or do not work. this is no different. so long as you get results it really shouldnt matter.
-sorry for the shitty still shots
Don’t worry about the still shots. I think this has more to do with obstacle negotiation and visual guidance than anything else which gets back to the stiffness argument in a round about way via preparation for landing and obstacle negotiation. Do you “Swing your leg” in the previous steps?
-
Participant
[quote author="davan" date="1229543249"][quote author="dbandre" date="1229514892"][quote author="davan" date="1229512930"]No, video is important because it isn’t just about foot positions, COM, etc., but also about GCTs and other factors.
Further, Carl focused on ankle stiffness in his post. You continue to just say stiffness and refer to overall leg stiffness, which is an important difference as it relates to what Carl says he is targeting by doing the drill in this fashion.
You then go on to post some nonsense about how this is bad if a person uses this as their sole or main mean of improving acceleration–I hope you weren’t serious when you posted that. I am not aware of anybody that uses the sled as their primary means of improving acceleration.
I’ll ask once again, like in the thread on cleans, to post vid. Your comments need some back-up with video because what you are saying is either unclear or isn’t phrased in a way that has a clear application. Not saying you need to post some 6.3-6.4 60m sprinter or something, just one of your high school athletes doing what you would consider a solid job on how to do this particular drill. It would make what is being discussed much clearer.
I gave author references for joint torsional stiffness for people to refer to. You can make the links there or you can refer to my website were I talk about the subject of angles using all three authors (Farley, Devita, and McCaw) I referenced. You could go further and link it to research of other authors and come to the same conclusion that stiffness is going to be reduced, it has to be, and the issue isn’t volitional extension here it’s flexion since when we are measuring stiffness we essentially discussing flexion at the ankle, knee, and hip at ground contact which correspond directly to leg stiffness and vertical stiffness and since the added mass is causing resistive forces against the line of pull and not gravitational forces normally associated with added loading. It’s kind of like running into a 20mph wind or greater that crosses the body at angle in the saggital plane. [/quote] You are arguing things that weren’t even being debated.
As the sole training purpose we’d see why sled pulling has little transference in motor learning of unloaded accelerations and yes there are coaches who only do sled pulling, hill running or other means as acceleration training.
That is not what we are discussing though. Saying this kind of detracts considering Carl and his athlete (and numerous other people) have explained that this is a drill that makes up a very small portion of their training and is in addition TO sprinting.
I said I would figure out how to post something to Carl’s request. As for your request of video, what good will that do? It doesn’t end the debate, it may only worsen the debate, if you need a video reference just pay attention to Carl’s athlete’s first 7 steps only in the video. Myself posting a video of a 14+s female sprinters pulling a non-weighted 15lb sled is virtually worthless, not to mention I might have 2 video segments at most or none at all in about 120 hours of tape to go through. I put them in sleds to develop the initial impulse and I am not sure it worked better than the slight inclines we used. I highly doubt I have any on my digitized copies as those are all mostly competitions, tests, and assorted exercise sequences and demonstrations I wanted for reference of which sled pulling is not one of them.
I’m not concerned about how fast they’re going–if they’re doing the drill correctly in what you define as the proper way to do it, I am interested in seeing it. I want to see if doing it your way also has no tibial rolling, over striding, and has optimal stiffness at specific shin angles.[/quote]
Everything I discussed is related davan if you believe it or not. [/quote] If you want to waste everyone’s time in this thread taking paragraphs to explain why sled pulls alone with no normal sprinting will not be optimal for improving acceleration, then continue, but it advances nothing that is being discussed. NOTHING.
The transference that will happen will not be seen in shin angles,
Says? The studies you are referencing did not test Carl’s method of sled pulls and certainly didn’t encompass Olympic hurdlers and their first 7/8 steps as their population and focus point, so I’m not sure what or how you can say that.
but in relative positioning of the COM like what is done in a sled pulling drill and this creates a gap in temporal-spatial awareness. So I don’t believe the transference which Carl wants will happen. The references I gave will let your learn to start collecting the dots on why this may not be the best way to achieve what Carl is wanting to achieve.
The majority of things you mentioned were not specific to what was being discussed, which was Carl’s method of pulling the sled. Even if you want to use them as an argument, it would only be against any resisted sprinting rather than against a specific way of going about it. Temporal-spatial awareness is obviously going to be changed in virtually ANY drill–do you think the longer GCTs in the method you are promoting have the same temporal-spatial awareness as normal sprinting?
The total package of training is what matters in the long run and what we have here is a slice of that training, to judge overall benefits the total package has to come into play and this is an unknown.
…………..
I also did not bring this drill being the “end all” you did.
When?
I said looking at the differences between sled pulling and unloaded will give you the reasons why transference the transference is not what you would likely want. This is the cornerstone in the building holding his public debate. The transference is in ability to generate a greater impulse at the start. That’s the overload stimulus here. The effectiveness of sled pulling in transference to the actual skill of acceleration out of the blocks diminishes the more steps you take with the sled.
And we are talking about a sled pull that is short and looking to improve Rican Hurdler’s first hurdle steps.
It’s similar to a falling start in unloaded acceleration drills which doesn’t have much usefulness past 15-20m except if you did them in conjuction with fly’s. I think if a coach did these loaded acceleration drills before any other acceleration work they would see greater transference to the unloaded skill in the seasonal training plan, however I don’t believe they would find them to be of much benefit as season wears on.
Arguing something that wasn’t being argued, again.
This last piece were speed doesn’t matter is flawed, speed does matter and speed is related to stiffness and acceleration capabilities. Doing the drill correctly isn’t about tibial roll per se, but about accelerating the sled as fast as possible.
Crack kills, DB. You justified not posting video of your girls doing drills because your girls are slow and now you’re saying they cannot do the drill at all?
Trying to determine stiffness in sled pulling on each contact would be a monumental task in and of itself and the only references would be shin angles and velocity at each ground contact. So what you’d look for is a larger step distance as I originally stated! If that happens then you are generating a greater initial impulse, greater stiffness, etc…
Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
-
Participant
Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
Davan:
I hate doing this but you are a moron. This drill will not help Carl’s athlete in the intended means he wishes, not from my understanding of biomechanics, motor control, and motor learning. The stimulus is going to be a greater initial impulse. The effect is it is going to put athlete closer to the hurdle assuming the sled mechanics don’t become dominate. So the question becomes does this solve the problem? I say it makes him become a 7 step hurdler from the start and not an 8 step hurdler or it makes the problem worse. Your inability to see this is not my problem. How many years is Rican Hurlder removed from 39s and does he do this with 39s? If he does, it suggest a learned pattern, if he doesn’t do them at 39s its a guidance and obstacle negotiation problem and a drill such as this may or may not make this better or easier to accomplish! There’s a whole host of issues that the coach has to consider. I am saying Carl’s justification is wrong, although doing the drill may be correct.
-
Participant
[quote author="davan" date="1229571793"] Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
Davan:
I hate doing this but you are a moron. This drill will not help Carl’s athlete in the intended means he wishes, not from my understanding of biomechanics, motor control, and motor learning. The stimulus is going to be a greater initial impulse. The effect is it is going to put athlete closer to the hurdle assuming the sled mechanics don’t become dominate. So the question becomes does this solve the problem? I say it makes him become a 7 step hurdler from the start and not an 8 step hurdler or it makes the problem worse. Your inability to see this is not my problem. How many years is Rican Hurlder removed from 39s and does he do this with 39s? If he does, it suggest a learned pattern, if he doesn’t do them at 39s its a guidance and obstacle negotiation problem and a drill such as this may or may not make this better or easier to accomplish! There’s a whole host of issues that the coach has to consider. I am saying Carl’s justification is wrong, although doing the drill may be correct.[/quote]
I dont understand, if davan is a moron why are you wasting your time explaing concepts in deep detail?
-
Participant
I am a moron because your belief that Carl’s athlete is only going to increase stride length from his initial start by using this drill? Well, when you post video or some information that has a basis for determining that this is the only thing that’s going to happen, we can consider that notion, until then, I’ll leave you with…
Post vid. Just like in the thread on olympic lifts.
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229573888"][quote author="davan" date="1229571793"] Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
Davan:
I hate doing this but you are a moron. This drill will not help Carl’s athlete in the intended means he wishes, not from my understanding of biomechanics, motor control, and motor learning. The stimulus is going to be a greater initial impulse. The effect is it is going to put athlete closer to the hurdle assuming the sled mechanics don’t become dominate. So the question becomes does this solve the problem? I say it makes him become a 7 step hurdler from the start and not an 8 step hurdler or it makes the problem worse. Your inability to see this is not my problem. How many years is Rican Hurlder removed from 39s and does he do this with 39s? If he does, it suggest a learned pattern, if he doesn’t do them at 39s its a guidance and obstacle negotiation problem and a drill such as this may or may not make this better or easier to accomplish! There’s a whole host of issues that the coach has to consider. I am saying Carl’s justification is wrong, although doing the drill may be correct.[/quote]
I dont understand, if davan is a moron why are you wasting your time explaing concepts in deep detail?[/quote]
That’s not why he is a moron. He’s a moron because he’s too lazy to go figure stuff out on his own or accept that what is said here is not gospel and many of us including myself could be wrong although I like my chances on this one. Instead he’s still confusing what Nick was discussing with what Carl was discussing and not understanding if you put the correct parts of both together you get what happens. I don’t know how many times I have to state and re-state to him either implicitly or explicitly.
-
Member
No problem. thats what this site is about right? learning and helping.
all the arguing is a bit ridiculous but as long as people are learning from each other than its cool.
-
Participant
[quote author="davan" date="1229571793"] Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
Davan:
I hate doing this but you are a moron. This drill will not help Carl’s athlete in the intended means he wishes, not from my understanding of biomechanics, motor control, and motor learning. The stimulus is going to be a greater initial impulse. The effect is it is going to put athlete closer to the hurdle assuming the sled mechanics don’t become dominate. So the question becomes does this solve the problem? I say it makes him become a 7 step hurdler from the start and not an 8 step hurdler or it makes the problem worse. Your inability to see this is not my problem. How many years is Rican Hurlder removed from 39s and does he do this with 39s? If he does, it suggest a learned pattern, if he doesn’t do them at 39s its a guidance and obstacle negotiation problem and a drill such as this may or may not make this better or easier to accomplish! There’s a whole host of issues that the coach has to consider. I am saying Carl’s justification is wrong, although doing the drill may be correct.
[/quote]Dbandre,
What is constant is the height of the hurdle and distance from the starting line. The take off distance is also somewhat constant with elite hurdlers. So our job is to get from the blocks from to the take off distance as fast as possible. We are getting further away from the hurdle and closer to the take off distance on a weekly basis and doing it faster. So the sled is not hurting us. If we are developing too much leg power that we are increasing stride length we can see that but also remember it’s easy to cut power to a minimum than to try to execute at full output.
-
Participant
I am a moron because your belief that Carl’s athlete is only going to increase stride length from his initial start by using this drill? Well, when you post video or some information that has a basis for determining that this is the only thing that’s going to happen, we can consider that notion, until then, I’ll leave you with…
Post vid. Just like in the thread on olympic lifts.
Dbandre…can you share anything on the sleds with video or still frames with your athletes and how you to them.
-
Participant
[b]Well, when you post video or some information that has a basis for determining that this is the only thing that’s going to happen, we can consider that notion, until then, I’ll leave you with…
Post vid. Just like in the thread on olympic lifts.[/b]
Yes please post a vid or the frames you were talking about earlier. Honestly I got more out of Rican’s pics than the arguing in this thread.
Olympic lift pics would also be good 😉
-
Participant
Dbandre,
What is constant is the height of the hurdle and distance from the starting line. The take off distance is also somewhat constant with elite hurdlers. So our job is to get from the blocks from to the take off distance as fast as possible. We are getting further away from the hurdle and closer to the take off distance on a weekly basis and doing it faster. So the sled is not hurting us. If we are developing too much leg power that we are increasing stride length we can see that but also remember it’s easy to cut power to a minimum than to try to execute at full output.[/quote]
Wow, how nice are you now? Funny, why didnt you get personal with Dbandre cause he said the same thing i said…? Becuase you dont have videos of him to talk shit about…becuase thats what you do best…talk shit about coaches, athletes, methods, videos…you name it!
-
Participant
I may be mistaken but I have always done sled work to help emphasize triple exension and forcefull pushing, hence the 10% rule to keep ground contacts time reasonable. Or is this being talked about just in different terms. If someone could clarify this that would be great.
Hector, are we ever going to get you to come back to Cary for a while.
-
Participant
[quote author="davan" date="1229574809"][b]Well, when you post video or some information that has a basis for determining that this is the only thing that’s going to happen, we can consider that notion, until then, I’ll leave you with…
Post vid. Just like in the thread on olympic lifts.[/b]
Yes please post a vid or the frames you were talking about earlier. Honestly I got more out of Rican’s pics than the arguing in this thread.
Olympic lift pics would also be good ;)[/quote]
GgArtguy:
This is what I don’t understand. The pics of rican give us more detail of what’s going on and maybe what Carl is looking for and at. What doesn’t help is myself or anyone else introducing pictures or videos of other athletes who don’t possess the same problems. Davan is asking for a video to show us proper acceleration of sled pulling and I don’t know if I have one and have to look for it so it’s going to take time. I told Carl I would put something together to help cross the action-language bridge for those who are visual. Give me some time on this.
-
Participant
I may be mistaken but I have always done sled work to help emphasize triple exension and forcefull pushing, hence the 10% rule to keep ground contacts time reasonable. Or is this being talked about just in different terms. If someone could clarify this that would be great.
Hector, are we ever going to get you to come back to Cary for a while.
It’s being talked about in same and different terms depending upon your point of reference.
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229573888"][quote author="davan" date="1229571793"] Stop wasting time and either post video or stop the nonsense.
Davan:
I hate doing this but you are a moron. This drill will not help Carl’s athlete in the intended means he wishes, not from my understanding of biomechanics, motor control, and motor learning. The stimulus is going to be a greater initial impulse. The effect is it is going to put athlete closer to the hurdle assuming the sled mechanics don’t become dominate. So the question becomes does this solve the problem? I say it makes him become a 7 step hurdler from the start and not an 8 step hurdler or it makes the problem worse. Your inability to see this is not my problem. How many years is Rican Hurlder removed from 39s and does he do this with 39s? If he does, it suggest a learned pattern, if he doesn’t do them at 39s its a guidance and obstacle negotiation problem and a drill such as this may or may not make this better or easier to accomplish! There’s a whole host of issues that the coach has to consider. I am saying Carl’s justification is wrong, although doing the drill may be correct.
[/quote]Dbandre,
What is constant is the height of the hurdle and distance from the starting line. The take off distance is also somewhat constant with elite hurdlers. So our job is to get from the blocks from to the take off distance as fast as possible. We are getting further away from the hurdle and closer to the take off distance on a weekly basis and doing it faster. So the sled is not hurting us. If we are developing too much leg power that we are increasing stride length we can see that but also remember it’s easy to cut power to a minimum than to try to execute at full output.[/quote]
That’s good to hear Carl about getting faster and closer. I imagine you are doing other things and yes it’s easier to cut power than having to go max every time. In rican’s still photos it looked like there was tape on the floor to mark his steps. Is this correct? If so then does he show consistency? Do you think getting to the take off distance on the 8th step will help correct the deficiency/flaw or do you think you may have to find a different set of cues and feedback to elicit the correct response?
[quote author="davan" date="1229574809"]I am a moron because your belief that Carl’s athlete is only going to increase stride length from his initial start by using this drill? Well, when you post video or some information that has a basis for determining that this is the only thing that’s going to happen, we can consider that notion, until then, I’ll leave you with…
Post vid. Just like in the thread on olympic lifts.
Dbandre…can you share anything on the sleds with video or still frames with your athletes and how you to them.[/quote].
As I said I will look, but I am doubtful of this right now looking through 60 tapes for a possible 2-3 segments of 2-3 minutes of sled pulling is not my idea of fun. If you have been to the repository which I have had available online for a year you can tell I don’t catalog stuff well. Even though I am getting around to it on the research articles, as far as tapes go cataloging them into digitized formats seems to be off in the distant future for now. Anyways, I have an interview for a coaching position tomorrow and I have several things I want to have lined up for that. I am just positive shin angles and stiffness are different and that stiffness will be less.
-
Participant
Can you elaborat further. I mean I understand that we are seeking greater force application but no one has mentioned extension. Upon my review of the video it seems like there is not complete extension with each stride (however for the hurdle start that may be necessary… I’m not qualified to say)
-
Participant
Dbandre,
What is constant is the height of the hurdle and distance from the starting line. The take off distance is also somewhat constant with elite hurdlers. So our job is to get from the blocks from to the take off distance as fast as possible. We are getting further away from the hurdle and closer to the take off distance on a weekly basis and doing it faster. So the sled is not hurting us. If we are developing too much leg power that we are increasing stride length we can see that but also remember it’s easy to cut power to a minimum than to try to execute at full output.
Wow, how nice are you now? Funny, why didnt you get personal with Dbandre cause he said the same thing i said…? Becuase you dont have videos of him to talk shit about…becuase thats what you do best…talk shit about coaches, athletes, methods, videos…you name it!
Nick:
Slow down, it’s not that. I said what you said but differently, but I also said you were wrong about the faster step rate in doing the drill. The faster step rate gives you more ground contact time to develop and sustain the impulse over a period of time. I also said Carl was only wrong in his justification (shin anglesstiffness) and the only thing in the video puzzling me was it looked like his stride rate stayed active throughout the drill and stride length stopped after the 7th step or so.
Personally, I am glad Carl talks shit about coaches, athletes, methods, videos, etc… because we don’t get anywhere without questioning, critiquing, or talking shit. Going off on tangents like Davan claiming I am off subject when I trying to relate what stiffness actually is and defined to be to the current argument is the kind of stuff that sets me off.
-
Participant
Can you elaborat further. I mean I understand that we are seeking greater force application but no one has mentioned extension. Upon my review of the video it seems like there is not complete extension with each stride (however for the hurdle start that may be necessary… I’m not qualified to say)
Complete extension in acceleration is not always necessary to maintain a smoother acceleration pattern. In the hurdles you need a smooth and consistent pattern which will allow you to get over the first hurdle and continue with your acceleration over the next 2 hurdles at which time the race becomes a rhythmic pattern of 3 step hurdling. The takeoff distance for athletes of the same speed is typically the same with the difference in race times being decided by hurdle take-offs and landings giving the hurdling a rhythm which may end up putting them too close or too far away from a hurdle at a specific hurdle number.
-
Member
I may be mistaken but I have always done sled work to help emphasize triple exension and forcefull pushing, hence the 10% rule to keep ground contacts time reasonable. Or is this being talked about just in different terms. If someone could clarify this that would be great.
Hector, are we ever going to get you to come back to Cary for a while.
wooahh!!! who is Hector? i go by rican hurdler lol jk
but i doubt ill be in that area anytime soon, no family lives in the area anymore, so unless i run at the Friendship and Freedom Games (NC A&T) this spring i wont be around.
-
Participant
Great blog, but this thread disappoints me. I saw the number of replies and hoped for a great discussion of the details of resisted accel work. I think I’ll start another sled thread as specific programming and application is a topic that hasn’t been explored much on this site.
Carl posted some sled work for a hurdler that served multiple purposes for improving ultimate event performance of the athlete. Sled pulls are a tool, but a tool for what. In his case the sled teaches and fosters mechanics beyond that of just adding load to the sprint action.
An aside…
When I first started coaching I thought exercise (sled pulls for better acceleration); then I thought more in terms of a specific means (acceleration unit-resisted sprints to overload accel). Now I’m trying to become better at using tools not only to develop an overall performance quality, but to hone and foster a variety of mechanics and qualities within a given larger training quality (blog example: accel unit -resisted sprints to overload stiffness of early foot contacts, foster decreased foreleg extension ratios that allow for shin angles to improve acceleration pattern)That’s what I like about this blog. It’s a great example of “what are you building in with your training elements.” In speed power programs you only have so many specific elements you can include so you better be maximizing the teaching/training adaptation efficiency of your stuff. Many people use the same training means. Those that get the best results maximize what they get out of those means.
-
Participant
Great blog, but this thread disappoints me. I saw the number of replies and hoped for a great discussion of the details of resisted accel work. I think I’ll start another sled thread as specific programming and application is a topic that hasn’t been explored much on this site.
Carl posted some sled work for a hurdler that served multiple purposes for improving ultimate event performance of the athlete. Sled pulls are a tool, but a tool for what. In his case the sled teaches and fosters mechanics beyond that of just adding load to the sprint action.
An aside…
When I first started coaching I thought exercise (sled pulls for better acceleration); then I thought more in terms of a specific means (acceleration unit-resisted sprints to overload accel). Now I’m trying to become better at using tools not only to develop an overall performance quality, but to hone and foster a variety of mechanics and qualities within a given larger training quality (blog example: accel unit -resisted sprints to overload stiffness of early foot contacts, foster decreased foreleg extension ratios that allow for shin angles to improve acceleration pattern)That’s what I like about this blog. It’s a great example of “what are you building in with your training elements.” In speed power programs you only have so many specific elements you can include so you better be maximizing the teaching/training adaptation efficiency of your stuff. Many people use the same training means. Those that get the best results maximize what they get out of those means.
The problem is increasing load reduces stiffness during the movement, the adaptation is increased stiffness which leads to greater stride lengths, but then you have a host of other issues of how this stiffness came about because of mechanical loading. The application of force or rather the direction of the force vector is different for the same angles in any loaded compared to zero load to unloaded. What’s the stimulus here? It’s the load or change in load. So what does a change in load affect? The ability to produce force. Is it event specific? Yes, to pulling a sled, that is the same sled with the same load with the same attachment point on the body using the same attachment length. The motor learning aspect just isn’t there for me, because if I get transference my athlete will accelerate as if pulling a sled. If that’s the desired output then fine, but it most likely is not, so it must be overload related anything else is nonsense.
BTW, I enjoy Carl’s blog and see eye to eye with him more than I ever did in the past. For instance one thing to gain from this is how and were the sled is attached to his by the cord. It’s at the waist or near the hips, closer to the center of mass and possibly below it. This is about the only place you can place the attachment point to minimize mechanical disturbance. It still moves the COM forwards slightly. The over the shoulder garbage sleds are a complete waist of time as they teach angles which require a huge load behind you to keep you upright and pushing at the same time.
There are many things I liked seeing in the video especially the first 7 or so steps. I didn’t comment until Nick’s post because I wasn’t sure what was going on after about the 7th step in the video, but Nick’s comments on the stride length-stride rate gave me an opportunity to chime in why I think the video is good one hand and bad on the other and how the assessments of both Nick and Carl have points I agree with and those I don’t and how they weren’t that far off base with each other to begin with. At some point you have to separate what’s going on acutely to what will happen with adaptation with chronic use. How often do you need to overload acceleration in terms of supramaximal force requirements? 1-2 times a month maybe. The rest of the time you are working at 85-95% in acceleration depending on the drill requirements, stimulus, and rest between reps.
The one thing I really disagree on is using sleds to have the athlete learn as flaws in acceleration should become more apparent by increasing the load. That’s a change from what I believed about a year and a half ago, I thought I could use sleds, short hills/inclines, vests to correct flaws and I was never able to. What I did see was using these as stimulus to overload. Everytime I used them as an overload stimulus (mostly used small inclines) I saw slightly better improvement in initial acceleration whether in a 30m test or in a competition. If the contention is to train and enhance ankle stiffness in isolation why not just do drop landings with the goal of having stiffer landings?
-
Participant
The ability to produce force. Is it event specific? Yes, to pulling a sled, that is the same sled with the same load with the same attachment point on the body using the same attachment length. The motor learning aspect just isn’t there for me, because if I get transference my athlete will accelerate as if pulling a sled. If that’s the desired output then fine, but it most likely is not, so it must be overload related anything else is nonsense.
No one said it was event specific. Not all training has to be event specific (good luck designing a great program with just portions of the exact event skill). Some would term it a special strength exercise or maximally specialized speed-strength (some eastern-European training zealot will probably show up to correct me). And yes its close proximity in terms of motor actions increases the chance for interference (of course you could also argue positive transfer). It’s a tool. You may not use it for all athletes and you certainly wouldn’t use it as a predominate means of training the sprint action.
Carl’s spoken before about how too much and crappy sled work can screw up hip flexion patterns (among other things) given the altered ground contact, force application and flight times. The best programs all use the sprinting action as the primary speed development means and they load it (high quality/with relative high volumes for the individual)
That’s where what I mentioned in the beginning of my post fits in. How do you program the resisted work? What are the technical concerns/models, loads, volumes, sequencing in the training session (resisted to end workout, contrast etc..) sequencing in the overall training plan (micro, meso, macro, and yearly). How do you manipulate these elements to get positive and maximal transference of the training tool?
Instead of just adding more talk about what we’re talking about I’ll contribute some observations and experiences to the thread.
In the individual workout I’m not huge on contrast setups, especially with elite athletes as I find you end up with compromised sprinting volumes (interference) following the resisted volumes (and you only have so much volume to play with to begin with). If you’re going to go the potentiation route I’ve found finding the sweet spot to be very difficult (difficulty furthered by equipment limitations). I do my sled work post speed and like enough volume to get a specific training effect, but not so much it becomes dominate means of acceleration volumes.
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229604198"] The ability to produce force. Is it event specific? Yes, to pulling a sled, that is the same sled with the same load with the same attachment point on the body using the same attachment length. The motor learning aspect just isn’t there for me, because if I get transference my athlete will accelerate as if pulling a sled. If that’s the desired output then fine, but it most likely is not, so it must be overload related anything else is nonsense.
No one said it was event specific. Not all training has to be event specific (good luck designing a great program with just portions of the exact event skill). Some would term it a special strength exercise or maximally specialized speed-strength (some eastern-European training zealot will probably show up to correct me). And yes its close proximity in terms of motor actions increases the chance for interference (of course you could also argue positive transfer). It’s a tool. You may not use it for all athletes and you certainly wouldn’t use it as a predominate means of training the sprint action.
Carl’s spoken before about how too much and crappy sled work can screw up hip flexion patterns (among other things) given the altered ground contact, force application and flight times. The best programs all use the sprinting action as the primary speed development means and they load it (high quality/with relative high volumes for the individual)
That’s where what I mentioned in the beginning of my post fits in. How do you program the resisted work? What are the technical concerns/models, loads, volumes, sequencing in the training session (resisted to end workout, contrast etc..) sequencing in the overall training plan (micro, meso, macro, and yearly). How do you manipulate these elements to get positive and maximal transference of the training tool?
Instead of just adding more talk about what we’re talking about I’ll contribute some observations and experiences to the thread.
In the individual workout I’m not huge on contrast setups, especially with elite athletes as I find you end up with compromised sprinting volumes (interference) following the resisted volumes (and you only have so much volume to play with to begin with). If you’re going to go the potentiation route I’ve found finding the sweet spot to be very difficult (difficulty furthered by equipment limitations). I do my sled work post speed and like enough volume to get a specific training effect, but not so much it becomes dominate means of acceleration volumes.[/quote]
Matt:
The best way to enhance motor learning comes with event specific tasks at speed. I don’t think contrasting setups are good either for any athlete probably less so on elite athletes than a novice, but I think this type of work might be better off in the beginning of the workout as it is specific strength related and that’s were all specific strength activities corresponding with daily training theme exist in my own workouts, because they become part of the warmup/lead in to the workout. Typically everything I setup in a workout goes from slower to faster movements, with the exception of weights which depends on the weight room availability in all instances (it’s better at the beginning or before the workout). The lead in to a cooldown session on a speed/accel day maybe a special endurance run or two of 250-300m during the early part of the season for conditioning purposes.
The reason I even responded to this thread was to defend Nick’s position because it is correct to an extent and instead he gets bashed which was nonsense, because no one had the balls to say this in a nutshell.
“You know what Carl, the video is fine, but the logic behind it is flawed and Nick’s no more wrong than you are on the stiffness and shin angles with relation to motor learning, because you both have to be talking adaptation because what’s occurring during the movement is an increase in load, a change in position of COM within the system to moved, and there is no way any coach has the equipment necessary to say that stiffness is increased compared to acceleration without a load, much less have it happen when there is an increase in external load without having the ability to sustain such a stiffness to begin with and therefore any transfer with respect to motor learning would be geared to sled pulling.”
Instead davan’s asking for my ahtlete’s pulling sleds and says he can see both sides when they are really talking about the same thing just from different perspectives.
I or anyone else could have taken either side in the argument and been right. Everyone here assumed Carl to be correct, because he’s Carl. I still say the issue at hand to rican’s specific problem is a response visual guidance to takeoff and obstacle negotiation and not specific strength or any other potpourri of nonsense and I just have a hard time seeing this work or being the solution from this tiny slice of his training. You have to account for all other training taking place. If this isn’t the dominate mode of acceleration training then what’s its purpose? You say specific strength related, well strength implies force. You also say you don’t want to minimize velocity, well that adds in a time component which suggests more powerful movement. Which means you need a greater impulse. This also means from the start of the sled pull you need more concentric strength, so a SSC is used to enhance concentric muscular action. The next step requires a little less concentric action and more elasticity from stiffness and this keeps building until maximal stiffness occurs in the pseudo bio-mechanical system of sled pulling and this is when acceleration stops.
-
Participant
i contacted 2 trusted sources of mine…one an olympic gold medalist coach and the other the biomachanist for UKA…also browsing through some litt i have…
all said of sleds, primary purpose is to develop explosive power and stride length…
my opinion has been backed up enough…so to fire at me like that was stupid.
I’m sure there are many good sprinters who can cover the first 10 meters in the usual 6.5-7.0 steps.
How many of these guys can go sub 1.90 for the same 10 meters?
Clearly there is a lot more going on than just stride length.
-
Participant
[quote author="Matt Gardner" date="1229607815"][quote author="dbandre" date="1229604198"] The ability to produce force. Is it event specific? Yes, to pulling a sled, that is the same sled with the same load with the same attachment point on the body using the same attachment length. The motor learning aspect just isn’t there for me, because if I get transference my athlete will accelerate as if pulling a sled. If that’s the desired output then fine, but it most likely is not, so it must be overload related anything else is nonsense.
No one said it was event specific. Not all training has to be event specific (good luck designing a great program with just portions of the exact event skill). Some would term it a special strength exercise or maximally specialized speed-strength (some eastern-European training zealot will probably show up to correct me). And yes its close proximity in terms of motor actions increases the chance for interference (of course you could also argue positive transfer). It’s a tool. You may not use it for all athletes and you certainly wouldn’t use it as a predominate means of training the sprint action.
Carl’s spoken before about how too much and crappy sled work can screw up hip flexion patterns (among other things) given the altered ground contact, force application and flight times. The best programs all use the sprinting action as the primary speed development means and they load it (high quality/with relative high volumes for the individual)
That’s where what I mentioned in the beginning of my post fits in. How do you program the resisted work? What are the technical concerns/models, loads, volumes, sequencing in the training session (resisted to end workout, contrast etc..) sequencing in the overall training plan (micro, meso, macro, and yearly). How do you manipulate these elements to get positive and maximal transference of the training tool?
Instead of just adding more talk about what we’re talking about I’ll contribute some observations and experiences to the thread.
In the individual workout I’m not huge on contrast setups, especially with elite athletes as I find you end up with compromised sprinting volumes (interference) following the resisted volumes (and you only have so much volume to play with to begin with). If you’re going to go the potentiation route I’ve found finding the sweet spot to be very difficult (difficulty furthered by equipment limitations). I do my sled work post speed and like enough volume to get a specific training effect, but not so much it becomes dominate means of acceleration volumes.[/quote]
Matt:
The best way to enhance motor learning comes with event specific tasks at speed. I don’t think contrasting setups are good either for any athlete probably less so on elite athletes than a novice, but I think this type of work might be better off in the beginning of the workout as it is specific strength related and that’s were all specific strength activities corresponding with daily training theme exist in my own workouts, because they become part of the warmup/lead in to the workout. Typically everything I setup in a workout goes from slower to faster movements, with the exception of weights which depends on the weight room availability in all instances (it’s better at the beginning or before the workout). The lead in to a cooldown session on a speed/accel day maybe a special endurance run or two of 250-300m during the early part of the season for conditioning purposes.
The reason I even responded to this thread was to defend Nick’s position because it is correct to an extent and instead he gets bashed which was nonsense, because no one had the balls to say this in a nutshell.
“You know what Carl, the video is fine, but the logic behind it is flawed and Nick’s no more wrong than you are on the stiffness and shin angles with relation to motor learning, because you both have to be talking adaptation because what’s occurring during the movement is an increase in load, a change in position of COM within the system to moved, and there is no way any coach has the equipment necessary to say that stiffness is increased compared to acceleration without a load, much less have it happen when there is an increase in external load without having the ability to sustain such a stiffness to begin with and therefore any transfer with respect to motor learning would be geared to sled pulling.”
Instead davan’s asking for my ahtlete’s pulling sleds and says he can see both sides when they are really talking about the same thing just from different perspectives.
I or anyone else could have taken either side in the argument and been right. Everyone here assumed Carl to be correct, because he’s Carl. I still say the issue at hand to rican’s specific problem is a response visual guidance to takeoff and obstacle negotiation and not specific strength or any other potpourri of nonsense and I just have a hard time seeing this work or being the solution from this tiny slice of his training. You have to account for all other training taking place. If this isn’t the dominate mode of acceleration training then what’s its purpose? You say specific strength related, well strength implies force. You also say you don’t want to minimize velocity, well that adds in a time component which suggests more powerful movement. Which means you need a greater impulse. This also means from the start of the sled pull you need more concentric strength, so a SSC is used to enhance concentric muscular action. The next step requires a little less concentric action and more elasticity from stiffness and this keeps building until maximal stiffness occurs in the pseudo bio-mechanical system of sled pulling and this is when acceleration stops.[/quote]
Please quote my statements instead of summarizing my statements as you have repeatedly put words in to my mouth. Just because you wield some sport science doesn’t mean you are right. From the video stiffness and shin angles are what we are trying to achieve and we posted clips and still shots. You have shared what you think could go wrong and even when we improve you still think that what we are doing is causing harm.
Other problems with your theoretical explanations of your interpretation of motor learning research is that you fail to show what does work as everything besides hurdling is wrong. If we do open sprinting you will argue we are teaching poor temporal awareness or disrupting rhythm. If we do bilateral squats you will argue we are not contracting our myofibrils at max speed. If we slow down after a run we are programming deceleration mechanics 18% of the time as each run as about 10-20m slow down.
I am happy to debate but you got to show video or cite the numbers and specifics of the research. If not I will argue moon waves and negative ions in the air causing disconnecting circuits all day and people will be more confused.
-
Participant
GgArtguy:
This is what I don’t understand. The pics of rican give us more detail of what’s going on and maybe what Carl is looking for and at. What doesn’t help is myself or anyone else introducing pictures or videos of other athletes who don’t possess the same problems. Davan is asking for a video to show us proper acceleration of sled pulling and I don’t know if I have one and have to look for it so it’s going to take time. I told Carl I would put something together to help cross the action-language bridge for those who are visual. Give me some time on this.
Youre right, Rican’s pics give us way more detail and providing examples other than his own shows great contrast as to what he was doing and where he wants to be. The point is that people have been asking you for visuals of any kind well before those pics and you have not provided any. When disecting the OL, I was easily able to find a sample lift of someone I dont even coach and still convey what I wanted. Why cant you do the same?
Im sure Rican isnt the only hurdler who has swung his leg or has some shin angle anomaly or whatever youre arguing about, so just do a quick youtube search, open up Photoshop, and bring on the visuals if you dont have time/desire/whatever to sift through your own videos. These visuals WILL help the discussion because many people are asking you clarify what youre saying. For you to say that it wont help us when we feel it will is suspect or just shows that youre not doing a good job of teaching.
-
Participant
rican hurdler Dec 17/08 post:
we did this sled work after a sprint day and i feel it helped.
i dont know the science behind it all and i honestly dont care to get into it but i know it helped me keep driving those last couple steps into the hurdle and that was the point of the drill.
rican hurdler Dec 17/08 later, post:
whether you feel this drill works or not it does not matter. I am proof that it does work and thats really all we care about.
there are a million and one drills out there you can do and you can ALWAYS justify why they work or do not work. this is no different. so long as you get results it really shouldnt matter.
While as a coach I guess I should understand all of the debate/discussion/bickering and the important role of the details, let us just say a fair bit of it is beyond me, not that I will not continue to seek understanding BUT the above quotes from the athlete in question are more important to me than some of the debatable infinitely small details.
I have an athlete at the moment about to be “in” some of the same possible situations (the leg swing versus having the foot plant under the body) and it may have taken me years to understand fully what rican hurdler got across to me in a couple of brief thoughts plus video and stills [my main course of action in the past has been to get athletes to adapt (read shorten) even earlier strides so as to allow them to be nearer a usual sprint stride at the 6th and 7th strides)…and yes, I know that that does not conform to known hurdle stride patterns in individual strides but I want them at a TO point where they can have success for the remainder of the race, 1H and 2H/3H to a slightly lesser degree are “set-up” for the remaining flights]
I am not saying I am going to incorporate similar sled pulls “carte blanche” but the thought process behind the drill, for whatever reason, and however partially right or wrong as some of the bickering has lead me to believe is the case and keep in mind it is a drill, gives me another avenue to travel down in an effort to get better results for an athlete.rican hurdler: keep working at it and keep up the posts!
-
Participant
[quote author="dbandre" date="1229610739"]
Matt:The best way to enhance motor learning comes with event specific tasks at speed. I don’t think contrasting setups are good either for any athlete probably less so on elite athletes than a novice, but I think this type of work might be better off in the beginning of the workout as it is specific strength related and that’s were all specific strength activities corresponding with daily training theme exist in my own workouts, because they become part of the warmup/lead in to the workout. Typically everything I setup in a workout goes from slower to faster movements, with the exception of weights which depends on the weight room availability in all instances (it’s better at the beginning or before the workout). The lead in to a cooldown session on a speed/accel day maybe a special endurance run or two of 250-300m during the early part of the season for conditioning purposes.
The reason I even responded to this thread was to defend Nick’s position because it is correct to an extent and instead he gets bashed which was nonsense, because no one had the balls to say this in a nutshell.
“You know what Carl, the video is fine, but the logic behind it is flawed and Nick’s no more wrong than you are on the stiffness and shin angles with relation to motor learning, because you both have to be talking adaptation because what’s occurring during the movement is an increase in load, a change in position of COM within the system to moved, and there is no way any coach has the equipment necessary to say that stiffness is increased compared to acceleration without a load, much less have it happen when there is an increase in external load without having the ability to sustain such a stiffness to begin with and therefore any transfer with respect to motor learning would be geared to sled pulling.”
Instead davan’s asking for my ahtlete’s pulling sleds and says he can see both sides when they are really talking about the same thing just from different perspectives.
I or anyone else could have taken either side in the argument and been right. Everyone here assumed Carl to be correct, because he’s Carl. I still say the issue at hand to rican’s specific problem is a response visual guidance to takeoff and obstacle negotiation and not specific strength or any other potpourri of nonsense and I just have a hard time seeing this work or being the solution from this tiny slice of his training. You have to account for all other training taking place. If this isn’t the dominate mode of acceleration training then what’s its purpose? You say specific strength related, well strength implies force. You also say you don’t want to minimize velocity, well that adds in a time component which suggests more powerful movement. Which means you need a greater impulse. This also means from the start of the sled pull you need more concentric strength, so a SSC is used to enhance concentric muscular action. The next step requires a little less concentric action and more elasticity from stiffness and this keeps building until maximal stiffness occurs in the pseudo bio-mechanical system of sled pulling and this is when acceleration stops.
Please quote my statements instead of summarizing my statements as you have repeatedly put words in to my mouth. Just because you wield some sport science doesn’t mean you are right. From the video stiffness and shin angles are what we are trying to achieve and we posted clips and still shots. You have shared what you think could go wrong and even when we improve you still think that what we are doing is causing harm.
Other problems with your theoretical explanations of your interpretation of motor learning research is that you fail to show what does work as everything besides hurdling is wrong. If we do open sprinting you will argue we are teaching poor temporal awareness or disrupting rhythm. If we do bilateral squats you will argue we are not contracting our myofibrils at max speed. If we slow down after a run we are programming deceleration mechanics 18% of the time as each run as about 10-20m slow down.
I am happy to debate but you got to show video or cite the numbers and specifics of the research. If not I will argue moon waves and negative ions in the air causing disconnecting circuits all day and people will be more confused.[/quote]
No one put words into your mouth. You did get snippy with Nick and blew this discussion out of proportion and way off tangent comparing apples and oranges instead of explaining how you’re both right. I also pleaded over and over for your response and none was given on the context for which Rican is using this exercise. Yes, I’ll argue if I think you are wrong, but I am not going to be your contrarian. I maintained you will lose stiffness during the movement and your contention is the preactivation will lead to improvement in stiffness during movement. This increased stiffness reflective in shin angles is not true. The preactivation for increasing stiffness will cause exactly what is going on and you are trying to fix. Now if Rican had the stiffness to support the greater load at speed, how come it’s not activate when unloaded!
As far as references I gave you authors, I gave you access to my own library. If you want to be a dickhead expect it back, don’t expect respect.
-
Participant
Dbandre,
We are comparing sled pulls with near 10% load to the sled marches stated in my blog post. I do hops for stiffness but working on isometric action instead of teaching yielding allows the the athlete to accelerate better….we are trying to shift qualities to become better not be perfect as it’s impossible when doing any sled work. We know we are compromising things when you choose to do a drill or derivative as “nothing beats the real thing.”
Attached is the research showing that step length is shortened and swing times decreased when using the sled. Those kinematic differences are what we want to bleed into our running mechanics as the differences are what we need more of to get 8 steps in from blocks to take off point.
Many athletes have that problem and other problems popping up.
-
Participant
Dbandre,
We are comparing sled pulls with near 10% load to the sled marches stated in my blog post. I do hops for stiffness but working on isometric action instead of teaching yielding allows the the athlete to accelerate better….we are trying to shift qualities to become better not be perfect as it’s impossible when doing any sled work. We know we are compromising things when you choose to do a drill or derivative as “nothing beats the real thing.”
Attached is the research showing that step length is shortened and swing times decreased when using the sled. Those kinematic differences are what we want to bleed into our running mechanics as the differences are what we need more of to get 8 steps in from blocks to take off point.
Many athletes have that problem and other problems popping up.
I really have a hard believing this will bleed into running mechanics as the adaptation is neural and directly related to initial impulse which increases stride length as I have contended. Certainly you can cut power, but I think your going to have to train cutting power without compromising impulse too much. I am by no means an expert hurdling coach or an expert in motor learning or biomechanics although in my theoretical world even the authors agree with everything I stated.
Lets also point out that I never contended the video as being wrong, there was something I did like at the very end, but I am not going to nitpick. I just don’t agree with the stiffness statement.
-
Participant
Dbandre,
The stiffness argument is vague so highlight what I am saying and respond with specif numbers instead of the neurophysiology.
My point is that we are still getting stiffness be it lower contributions. If you say it’s zero than you need to prove that with hard core research. Stiffness doesn’t have to be just elastic work at top speed but some contributions occur even at low forces and low speeds just at a smaller percentage.
I am not saying sled work is a stiffness enhancer as some hops with low amplitude done in small doses is the accepted mode of work.
Athletes have now and in the past used the sensations and able for them to transfer those kinetic influences into kinematic results otherwise we wouldn’t get any results in technique from improving muscle strength.
-
Participant
Dbandre,
The stiffness argument is vague so highlight what I am saying and respond with specif numbers instead of the neurophysiology.
My point is that we are still getting stiffness be it lower contributions. If you say it’s zero than you need to prove that with hard core research. Stiffness doesn’t have to be just elastic work at top speed but some contributions occur even at low forces and low speeds just at a smaller percentage.
I am not saying sled work is a stiffness enhancer as some hops with low amplitude done in small doses is the accepted mode of work.
Athletes have now and in the past used the sensations and able for them to transfer those kinetic influences into kinematic results otherwise we wouldn’t get any results in technique from improving muscle strength.
I am by no means saying stiffness is zero. What I am saying is the sled pull drill has reduced stiffness for each given step in the acceleration pattern and this is directly related to mass and velocity of the mechanical system (athlete and sled together). During sled pulling this should increase stride rate and cut it short leg swings to increase acceleration because power comes from impulse which is going to be related to shorter ground contacts spread out over a slower time span which increases total ground contact time while not solely stressing contribution from concentric muscular action which the “dos” reindeer games sled pulls look to be doing with the plantar flexed ankles.
The crux as I see it is, “What is the best way to learn acceleration from this?” I think doing non-fatiguing (near maximal pulls of 5-20m) before doing any other acceleration drill will excite the neural activation you want while working in the unloaded state. This leaves the athlete with the last impression of acceleration in the unloaded state at higher level activation. I think this gets back to the initial impulse argument and with a greater impulse the adaptation is going to be a larger stride length and possibly faster stride rate acceleration pattern from the increased stiffness gained during adaptation to cope with increases in forces at ground contact. In a way this is almost similar to hopping with low amplitude, especially if you consider the work of Farley in this area!
I believe you stated the goal was to quicken the stride rate from cutting the swing time. Although on some grounds I think this can have merit, one being that of correcting over-striding which I think is your goal for using the drill if I am correct. Somehow you came to this conclusion but upon different logic or reasoning which I don’t believe is correct. Quickening the stride rate is fine, but for a coach who doesn’t know any better who now reads he should be doing sled drills to quicken stride rate and investigates no further when the quickened stride rate in the loaded condition is a result of achieving a task demand at increased loads and not achieving a task demand at normal load in terms of system mass. A drill is incomplete in providing the proper stimulus without the context of training demands.
I hope this highlights what I believe we agree on and what we don’t agree on as there is much we agree on. Yes, I know I am scatterbrained occasionally, but not on this subject.
-
Participant
Carl invited me into this conversation to give my thoughts about sled training.
We use either tyre, sled (with a slightly longer rope that what is shown on Carl’s video) and isorobic. The times are about 10-15% slower than free sprinting, so we can load up more for the shorter distances than the longer distances (i’ve used up to 60m) and 100m in special case with very light sled. One of my guys can run 30m in 3.40ht and mid 3.7ht with tyre.
Other resisted activities include hills and med ball.
We’ve found that stride length is reduced and frequency not much, air time is of course the parameter which is sacrificed with resistance sprinting.
We use it once a week and mix it with starting block training.
Our main concern is to work acceleration segments, hence the need to push it up to 60m. Bridge between strength and speed, specific muscle strength, start and accel positions learning, contrast load effects, all are things we are looking for.Ladji Doucouré has been mentioned in this thread. I think the video mentioned was taken during 2005 European Indoor Champs and it was a very bad race for him so clearly not typical of his pattern. At training he uses heavy sleds (i’ve seen 40kg for distance around 30m), sled marching, elastic marching, basically all that many posters reject in this board. However, it’s not clear how much all this work is responsable to his 12.97/world title and to his various leg injuries in recent years.
-
Participant
PJV:
I am not sure this doesn’t fit better into Matt Gardner’s thread on “programming resisted running” than here.
-
Participant
Carl invited me into this conversation to give my thoughts about sled training.
We use either tyre, sled (with a slightly longer rope that what is shown on Carl’s video) and isorobic. The times are about 10-15% slower than free sprinting, so we can load up more for the shorter distances than the longer distances (i’ve used up to 60m) and 100m in special case with very light sled. One of my guys can run 30m in 3.40ht and mid 3.7ht with tyre.
Other resisted activities include hills and med ball.
We’ve found that stride length is reduced and frequency not much, air time is of course the parameter which is sacrificed with resistance sprinting.
We use it once a week and mix it with starting block training.
Our main concern is to work acceleration segments, hence the need to push it up to 60m. Bridge between strength and speed, specific muscle strength, start and accel positions learning, contrast load effects, all are things we are looking for.Ladji Doucouré has been mentioned in this thread. I think the video mentioned was taken during 2005 European Indoor Champs and it was a very bad race for him so clearly not typical of his pattern. At training he uses heavy sleds (i’ve seen 40kg for distance around 30m), sled marching, elastic marching, basically all that many posters reject in this board. However, it’s not clear how much all this work is responsable to his 12.97/world title and to his various leg injuries in recent years.
7.50 was Ladji performance and it wasn’t perfect but very bad is hard to understand when it looks like it’s his second best performance for indoors PJ. It isn’t perfect but 7.50 is a good enough time to display our needs as an example.
-
Participant
Very bad was surely excessive, however this race is not representative of Ladji’s level, even if it’s his second best ever, his indoor race history doesn’t mach his outdoor record. 7.50 is not in par with 12.97 and several 13.0x.
30m is a key distance for sprinters, the fact that some non sprinters excell at this distance doesn’t matter. After 15-17 steps, sprinters are reaching their max frequency, they are now almost stand up, they are running at about 95% of their max speed, 30m point is easy to find on a track (3rd women hurdle mark) and mid point of indoor 60m, convenient for races analysis to check accel and speed component shares after winter prep.
-
Viewing 86 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.