Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Short to Long with Team Sports

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    750

    Re: Short to Long with Team Sports

    Quote Originally Posted by Swogger View Post
    In "Inside the SPP" Charlie breaks down the short to long approach and details the series of special endurance 60m runs with incomplete recovery. It is apparent that team sport athletes should follow short to long rather than long to short because as Charlie has said, there is no reason for them to be running 600s and the like.

    On the other hand, the High Intensity Training for Sport graphic shows that special endurance is not a quality needed for team sport athletes. Therefore, how should the short to long program be altered to account for this?

    There seem to be some issues here. First, due to mandates by the governing bodies of the sport and/or collective bargaining agreements, there is simply not enough time to perform all runs with complete recovery without sacrificing volume substantially.

    If sticking with 60 meter runs with recoveries approaching 10 minutes between reps, it is only feasible to perform perhaps 3 to 4 reps (factoring in the warm-up and assuming there is also a lift that day because again, time is limited). If the distance is reduced to 40m and rest between reps is dropped to 5 minutes, you're probably looking at something like 2x4x40 at the most.

    These volumes may be fine for sports like soccer which will have a lower ratio of high intensity to low intensity training. But for sports with a large speed component like football, would these low volumes be enough to stimulate adaptation or would you be better off with higher volumes and incomplete recovery (2-3 min) but thus entering the special endurance zone?

    Also, what might be the very lower limit of "complete recovery"? Could you perhaps get away with 60m runs with 5 min between reps, so that sufficient volume is achieved without pushing too much lactate?
    One of the questions you have to answer is who is your specific athlete population? What sport do they play, how old are they, and how fast?

    If they are developing athletes, are they at a rudimentary technical level, or greater?

    A developing athlete wouldn't need the rest times that an elite NFL wideout would.

    I choose not to have my developing athletes go beyond an acceleration phase until their mechanics allow them to sprint upright with a decent understanding of what upright / max velocity mechanics should feel and look like. I am NOT saying that they don't do upright running! They just do it in a controlled fashion at a lower speed after some very deliberate drills that set them up for technical success.

    To teach upright mechanics from scratch, I do:

    -a variety of resistance band drills from a static non-forward moving position in 3D so they know how to position their pelvis in space [e.g. side-lying, standing, prone quadruped, supine]
    -drills with double support with limited forward movement (e.g. two foot hops),
    -single leg A skip (no forward movement- step down through the ground and create positive hip displacement)
    -single leg A skip (with forward movement- step down through the ground and create positive hip displacement)
    -regular A skip (step down through the ground and create positive hip displacement)
    -upright runs from a standing start over mini-hurdles which reinforce the "stepping over the support knee" idea
    -[this could be seen as a variation of Vince Anderson's "wicket drill"- the original Anderson wicket drill has a running start, which is a DISASTER of a drill for athletes with rudimentary technique- their technique goes to hell instantly]

    They tend to only reach 80%-85% of maximum velocity at first, but it does teach what good sprint technique should feel, look and sound like.

    It also allows me to include many more safe metres of upright sprints with minimal rest.

    As they become more comfortable with quality technique, I take the drill out further and add flying zones, where they will be able to hit 90% or better of their top speed.

    With elite athletes who already have solid mechanics, this is probably somewhat of a moot point.

    With regard to volume, I am a big believer in getting your technical model in order first, then worrying about running super fast over 40 metres or longer.

    Huge thanks to Ange for posting the awesome training log of an elite NFL player that CF trained! It's always fascinating to see what Charlie did with a variety of athletes.
    Last edited by T-Slow; 11-25-2015 at 10:26 PM.

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: Short to Long with Team Sports

    Working with team sports, I think it's important to understand the athlete's demands. Ange's example of Charlie's sessions for a wide receiver shows the benefit of creating speed reserve with fairly long rests. Linemen would likely have a different training demand consisting of shorter sprints, and likely a high amount of medicine ball throws and box jumps. Charlie's chart (I can't recall which product) of the training exercises for the length of sprinting demands is one of the best resources that I continue to review annually.

    I recall several things discussed on here with Charlie when I first started working in team sports. When I was working with soccer players, Charlie and I discussed the need for speed reserve taking those players out to 30-40m. Another discussion point I recall is when I had athletes return for a second training year, how to progress them. I remember asking him how can I increase the volume, and his reply was something like, "why do you need to increase volume, couldn't the increased improvements continue to work? "

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Charlotte N.C.
    Posts
    2,249

    Re: Short to Long with Team Sports

    What's pertinent to understand is the reference point from which stimulus A, B, or C effects targeted ability A, B, or C. In this way, every team sport athlete, regardless of discipline, benefits from enhanced acceleration ability and fewer benefit from enhanced maximum velocity.

    Interestingly, in the team sport realm, the vast majority of even the fastest male athletes will hit their max V long before an elite male 100m sprinter. for this reason, the speed reserve stimulus necessary to advance the elite hundred meter man is different than that required for the rugby back, American football receiver, and so on.

    The field sport athlete who hit's max V at 40m, doesn't need much more than 40m to stimulate speed reserve. This is where the flying sprints are so useful by the way.

    So the real question is what is the point/distance in which your athletes hit max V. This distance is the reference point from which sprint training that serves to advance max V must be based upon. While the American football guard or Rugby tight head prop might only need 30m to spike max velocity, the odd winger or receiver (such as Charlie's work with the KC receiver) might very well benefit from work out to 60-80m.

    I used split 60m special endurance reps (with advancing intensity limits) with my Rugby 7's players in Portugal simply as a more favorable lactic alternative to the misdirected yo-yo work the coach was married to.

    In Indianapolis combine training, historically, I always used max V, and beyond, distances for the athletes to improve their 40yd times.

  4. #14
    Administrator Angela Coon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,739

    Re: Short to Long with Team Sports

    Quote Originally Posted by James Smith View Post
    What's pertinent to understand is the reference point from which stimulus A, B, or C effects targeted ability A, B, or C. In this way, every team sport athlete, regardless of discipline, benefits from enhanced acceleration ability and fewer benefit from enhanced maximum velocity.

    Interestingly, in the team sport realm, the vast majority of even the fastest male athletes will hit their max V long before an elite male 100m sprinter. for this reason, the speed reserve stimulus necessary to advance the elite hundred meter man is different than that required for the rugby back, American football receiver, and so on.

    The field sport athlete who hit's max V at 40m, doesn't need much more than 40m to stimulate speed reserve. This is where the flying sprints are so useful by the way.

    So the real question is what is the point/distance in which your athletes hit max V. This distance is the reference point from which sprint training that serves to advance max V must be based upon. While the American football guard or Rugby tight head prop might only need 30m to spike max velocity, the odd winger or receiver (such as Charlie's work with the KC receiver) might very well benefit from work out to 60-80m.

    I used split 60m special endurance reps (with advancing intensity limits) with my Rugby 7's players in Portugal simply as a more favorable lactic alternative to the misdirected yo-yo work the coach was married to.

    In Indianapolis combine training, historically, I always used max V, and beyond, distances for the athletes to improve their 40yd times.


    Good discussion guys.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •