'Magical' Quotes

Since Colin Jackson began commentating, the word 'magical' has lost all meaning. No adjective has been so abused by one individual. However, below are a few quotes I have stumbled on over the past few months from various places, including twitter and the World Athletics Centre website. Each of these statements have had a lasting impression on me, and have shaped my own coaching and training.

The twitter handles are written where appropriate and a special mentioned goes out to @MikeYoung for posting some of these quotes on twitter from a Speed Summit last August. If you're serious about sprinting, you need to be following these guys!

There is a work/rest ratio tipping point based on age/experience – less volume can often improve performance @PfaffSC

Read any interview with any Olympian over 33yrs old – first thing they say is “I changed how I trained ” @PfaffSC

When I finally figured out less is more, I learned how to manage my personal work habits @PfaffSC

It has been my experience that there are many non-specific factors that improve performance @bodybyobrien

“You don’t have to be perfect to be fast” @StuartMcMillan1

What is your genetic propensity to train? Potential for power? Recovery? Injury prev. @KoeniGator @athletigen

For top end speed, we need to look outside of the weight room....specific plyo types & sprinting are the most specific means

Extra weight is a bad thing if you're trying to maximize speed - Weyand

Volume has a place but needs to be balanced with high intensity load - Dugas

What abilities do you sacrifice by getting “strong in a hurry” – coordination, fine motor control. @CoachSanAndreas

Avoid fostering catastrophic thinking – don’t make every session, cycle, season a critical one. @PfaffSC

Over the years, training volumes decrease, and success seems to improve. @CoachSanAndreas

‘The grind’ can get you far into a career – however at some point it becomes the fatal flaw. @PfaffSC

The athlete is often the best judge of when they are feeling best. Listen.

“Better athletes spend more time in front side mechanics” - Dr Gerry Ramogida

Plan B protocols utilize dribble series to re-introduce sprint mechanics & velocities.

“POSTURE – a recurring focus – critical to be reinforced by both coach and therapist” - Dr Gerry Ramogida

“70 hours of sleep per week seems to fix many problems from a therapeutic perspective” - Dan Pfaff

Sleep, hydration, and nutrition are the platform on which high performance is built. @DrGerryRamogida

Resisted runs & hills are a more specific way of developing acceleration abilities in a manner that facilitates good mechanics

At moderate speed & faster, hip excursion (step length) doesn't change...so running faster occurs from decreasing contact time 

Less is more?

Around two years ago, I stumbled upon Stu McMillan's blog, and a concept called the Minimum Effective Dose (here's the article - http://www.mcmillanspeed.com/2013/02/more-on-med.html). I had often used the phrase 'less is more' when sprinters had asked me for advice.

My post 'To continue training or not?' considers training less from an injury prevention stand point, the idea being that doing less training allows you to be uninjured for a greater proportion of the training cycle, therefore allowing you to train more consistently. I also believe that this theory holds true in the context of performance, as when practising maximal velocity sprints, there is a finite amount you can do in a session before the sprints are no longer maximal. In one of my most successful seasons I had the privilege of working with Dave Lease who has a very 'cutting edge' approach towards sprint training. One of the sessions we would do would consist of three 'flying 30s'. A flying 30 consists of a slightly sub-maximal acceleration, where you gradually build up to maximum speed by the time you reach the first marker or timing gate. This maximum speed is then maintained until you reach the second marker or timing gate, 30 metres further down the track. These would be done with six minutes recovery. This example applies the concept of M.E.D. in terms of volume, whilst the intensity is maintained at a very high level. At the time, the volume of these sessions seemed surprisingly low and I would leave them not feeling like I had done a lot. However, in my first 60 metre competition that winter, I took 0.23 seconds off my personal best. Throughout the season, I then improved this by a further 0.06 seconds. When the outdoor season arrived, I took 0.4 seconds off my 100 and 200 metre personal bests. Of course there were many factors that contributed to those improvements, but seeing as my flying 30 time improved by 0.21 seconds throughout the winter, it would be foolish to neglect the possibility that those sessions were an important factor.

Recently I have been considering the concept of 'less is more', but in terms of intensity. In my last post 'The skill of sprinting', I touched on this idea in terms of myelination, and gave an example of a track session Pietro Mennea is reported to have done. I don't think that all training can be done at sub maximal intensities, as in order to sprint as fast as you can, it simply makes sense to practise sprinting as fast as you can. However, I think there may be something in holding back on the intensity at times. In the weights room, it is very easy to chase personal bests for a given repetition range, because unless you have access to some relatively expensive timing equipment, it is one of the few facets of training that is easily quantifiable. Therefore, it becomes easy to assume you are in 'better shape', because you have improved your one rep max in your power clean by five kilograms. A close friend of mine has a 100 metre personal best of 10.22 seconds. At the time he could clean around 125-130 kilograms. A couple of years later, he increased his clean to 155 kilograms! However, his personal best remains at 10.22 seconds. The reasons for this are beyond the scope of this article, but the point is that increasing intensity in the weights room does not always lead to superior performances on the track. Therefore holding the intensity back when lifting, which is also safer in terms of allowing for correct technique, and leaving the weights room less 'beaten up' may allow for superior training in the following track session and contribute to better performances in the competitive season.

PBs in the weights room don't guarantee PBs on the track.

This winter, I have taken a step back from the gym, and avoided chasing new rep maxes. I have also scaled back to only two track sessions per week, one of which has quite regularly been three or four flying 30s. The results of this remain to be seen, however, I have trained far more consistently and feel more confident than I have done for many seasons.

The skill of sprinting.

Before a certain Usain Bolt came around, if you asked the regular fitness enthusiast how they would build the ideal sprinter, I'm fairly confident not many descriptions would omit the term 'muscular'. The likes of Linford Christie, Maurice Greene and Ato Boldon all had the chiselled physique of a fitness model. In the early part of this century, Kevin Levrone, a body builder, challenged Dwain Chambers (who at the time could be mistaken for a body builder) to a sixty metre sprint, seemingly convinced he could turn over a world class sprinter. With all of this in mind, you could be forgiven for believing that sprinting is a strength endeavour. The logic being, the faster athletes tend to have more muscle, and therefore tend to be stronger. I believe it is correct that all else being equal, the stronger sprinter will win. But that 'all else' is very important.

I used to be of the over simplistic opinion that if F=ma (force = mass x acceleration), then provided I increased F and m remained fairly constant, a would increase. Each step would deliver more force, and I would run more quickly. Newton seemed like he knew his stuff, so follow his rules and you won't go too far wrong. A lot of elite sprinters looked pretty big, they could apply a lot force, so I would try and do the same. This, however, didn't account for the likes of Carl Lewis, Christian Malcolm and Frank Fredericks, all of whom were far more slender in their build.

I recently read Daniel Coyle's 'The Talent Code', in which he discusses the 10,000 hour rule, which states that in order to reach expert status, 10,000 hours of practise is required, and applies it to various activities. I don't believe this rule is appropriate for sprinting, and agree with Craig Pickering in his article 'Sprinting and the 10,000-Hour Rule'. If Usain Bolt and I both had 10,000 hours of practise, it still wouldn't be a nail-biting contest. However Coyle certainly offered me a new perspective in terms of how I viewed sprinting. I enjoyed the first part of 'The Talent Code' the most, in which Coyle discusses myelin, the sheath which insulates our neurons, allowing the signals to travel more rapidly. In it's wisdom the body detects the frequently used neural pathways, and insulates them with more and more myelin. The more you do a particular movement, the more myelin that gets synthesised around the relevant neurons, the faster and more accurately you can complete that movement. I now understood a mechanism behind skill acquisition and how 'practise' worked! This was great news for me, because unless I understand how and why something works, then I remain pretty cynical.

The myeline sheath coats the nerve.

Now I understood more about the 'all else', I felt more comfortable prioritising it. I saw more value in drills focussing on the key technical pointers, largely based around posture and foot position, with various other cues depending upon which race aspect is being trained. I also had an explanation as to why it may be beneficial to complete a higher volume of slightly lower intensity work, within reason. Pietro Mennea supposedly completed sessions such as three sets of five reps of 80 metres, followed by three reps of 100 metres, followed by three reps of 400 metres! This session is reported as being completed with two minutes recovery between the reps and nine minutes between the sets. Besides the volume of work being done, what struck me was that these runs would be completed at a significantly sub maximal speed (around 9 seconds for 80 metres and 11.5 seconds for 100 metres, for a 19.72 200 metre guy). In an interview, Hakan Andersson has been quoted as saying that completing 60 to 80 metres at 92-98% intensity allows impressive volumes to be completed with a technique that resembles maximal velocity 'pretty much without fatigue'. When you consider the myelination that could occur in such sessions, provided they are completed with competent technique, it is clear to see how the athlete could benefit. The neural pathways used become better insulated, and therefore movements become more automatic and can be completed more quickly.

Warren Weir demonstrating some well practised mechanics.

Often we see athletes produce performances indoors over 60 metres that seem superior to what they then produce outdoors over 100 metres (not to say the opposite is not also noticed). This could be due to a number of reasons, but two are relevant to this post. If a programme has an excessive focus on strength development and an inadequate focus on sprinting 'skill', this could lead to two reasons why an athlete may have a better relative 60 metre performance than 100 metre performance. Maximal strength plays a large role in the acceleration segment of a race, which contributes to a greater percentage of a 60 metre performance than it does to 100 metres. Secondly, in the 100 metres speed endurance comes into play. If the sprinters are less skilled, their movements may be less efficient, which could lead to a greater rate of deceleration.

I continue to value the importance of strength work for force application and injury prevention. But if you are able to apply all the force in the world, how helpful is that if it is done so in the wrong direction? Correct movement should be paramount and it needs to be rehearsed to make it more efficient and sharper. When you train are you making myelin work for you?

References:

Interview with Hakan Andersson http://complementarytraining.net/interview-with-hakan-andersson/

Pietro Menna's Detailed Training Workouts for 200 metres http://speedendurance.com/2010/05/10/pietro-menneas-detailed-training-workouts-for-200-meters/

Chasing the Holy Grail

For an athlete of my level (pretty low, just search for my performances on www.powerof10.info for validation), I have made a lot sacrifices to train in certain locations, with certain groups and learn from certain coaches. I have been extremely fortunate to be made to feel so welcome, so regularly, and to learn from some of the best coaches and athletes, not just in the UK, but in the world. I have travelled far and wide to try and find the 'perfect programme'.

Guess what?!

I could probably end this post right here!

I didn't have a lot of success in my junior years (it improved slightly as a senior), so as an athlete without a great deal of natural talent, I wanted to know exactly how to train. This would mean I would make no mistakes in this respect, thus maximising my performance. I spoke to lots of coaches, I searched forums but with such a variety of information available, my ideas became inconsistent and therefore so did my training. I became difficult to coach, because I would lose faith in the coach if his ideas didn't coincide with mine at the time, and I always believed I knew best (in hindsight, there's occasions where I'm pretty certain I did). I overcomplicated training, and would stress myself out with a piece of paper in front of me, trying to decide the exact volume, intensity and density of each session, whilst trying to write that perfect programme. I was becoming the definition of paralysis by analysis.

I must have had an epiphany, and realised how ridiculous this situation was. I started to relax a little and gained some perspective. I became less worried about the minutiae and realised that a thirty metre sprint too little or too many in the whole scheme of things was not going impact my performance, as long as I was doing some sprinting! A very important lesson was reinforced. The best athletes, or the best at anything for that matter, are often those who do the basics well. I realised that provided I addressed acceleration, maximum velocity, speed endurance and some strength appropriately, I would probably be okay.

This all led to training becoming significantly less stressful. I now enjoy it to the point that the highlight of my week is my Friday morning track session (I lead a pretty dull life)! I also began to stick to a programme consistently, because the fundamentals don't change. I believe this consistency is very important, which is why we become so frustrated when we get injured and can't train.

To sum up, the best programme will always be the programme you are not doing. I suspect this mentality becomes more prevalent in less successful athletes, as the more successful athletes are already doing well without having to search deeper for answers. Usain Bolt is probably not looking at my programme and trying to convince his coach, Glen Mills, to incorporate parts of it into his own (if he is, then I can provide a very reasonably priced consultation!). As an athlete at a club level, it is very enticing to want to copy what the elite do, but when their programmes contradict each other, what do you do? To avoid this, concern yourself with the basics and make sure you are doing them well. I'm pretty sure that will take an athlete a large percentage of the way to success.

I eagerly await your email lads, the address is at the top pf the page.