|
Post by runner4ever on Dec 4, 2007 19:36:56 GMT -5
What does everyone do for there winter training for track? I just wanted to see what everyone thought.
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Dec 8, 2007 15:50:01 GMT -5
I always did a lot of base work and lifted weights and in early-to-mid-Feb or so I would start doing tempo runs and longer repeats (1200-1600) until outdoor track started in April. It usually depended on the weather with me.
|
|
|
Post by volsxc1 on Dec 14, 2007 11:20:16 GMT -5
Winter is a time to let your body recover from a long and hard cross country season and a time to start building your base for track. November, December and January (if you're not doing any Jr. Olympics/footlocker racing) is a great time to just start building your quality miles. Also, this is the perfect time to hit the weightroom to start building your strength, encorporating core muscle work, as well as weight training. Dynamic flexibility work would also help with keeping your body loose and to help prevent injuries for when the season finally starts. Once you start getting closer to season it's a good idea to start adding some fartlek, hills, long/slow intervals for endurance strength. Now, I realize track is more of a speed sport, but if you incorporate speed to early, you will typically get adverse affects by the end of the year. I'm sure dbandre can enlighten you with a more technical approach to this all.
Most importantly at this time of year, listen to your body to ensure you don't over-do it in the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Dec 17, 2007 8:27:31 GMT -5
Speed is a trainable skill and must be trained year round regardless of sport. I am only talking about alactic training (without lactic acid) so the distance types don't get confused. The overall yearly volume to which you train it depends on your sport/event and the competitions you are training in. This type of training consists of very short and very intense efforts of 4-7s with complete rest (4-7 minutes or 1 minute for each second ran) between reps with no more than 12 repetitions total. If it is not the core part of the workout such as is the case with distance runners it should be completed as part of the athletes warmup routine (the last part). For distance runners 4-5 reps @ 2x per week in the competitive season would be a goal to 1x per week at 6-8 reps in last 3-4 weeks of the season. This type of work will keep the nervous system primed throughout the year for the distance runner without too much stress or interference in the training program with respect to training endurance abilities of the athlete.
When developing speed attributes in an athlete, complete REST is a must, anything short of that, over 8 seconds long in duration, and over 12 reps is a waste of time especially during base training. Just as with any other sport keep your focus on keeping your training with overall goal in mind and not an ancillary goal such as speed. An 800m runner would likely do a greater overall load than a 1600m runner and that 1600m runner would do a greater load than a 3200m runner in terms of pure alactic speed work over the course of a year.
Dynamic flexibility is a must, I would suggest that distance runners use a dynamic routine as part of their warmup everyday, especially days they do any type of alactic or lactic speed work or run a race. I include mach drills in this category of dynamic warmup. I also include hurdle mobility drills in this category but for distance runners I prefer to use this after LSD workouts or any workouts were they look to be running tight, as distance runners run with a shorter range of motion those muscles needed to be worked as part of the cool down process in a way to actively stress the muscle while still getting some cardiovascular benefits as opposed to static stretching (hurdle mobility after the cooldown runner and just before the showers).
|
|
|
Post by newpackman on Dec 17, 2007 12:27:53 GMT -5
I'll be honest I kind of skimed what you wrote, but I agree with it as a whole. I'm not a big fan of the weightroom, but I've found core work can really help. As for speed, you do need talent to a certain extent to have speed. I have never been fast in a sprint, and that's not from lack of trying.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Dec 17, 2007 20:48:11 GMT -5
Some would say that endurance is mostly talent. The beauty of the human body is it's ability to adapt. All adaptations are specific to training age, training load, rest, and endocrine profile of the athlete at that point in training. It's a constant cycle of stress, rest, adapt. The goal of any runners training program is to run faster for a given distance. That in and of itself necessitates the need to train running speed across the board in all runners. The endurance athlete has the added pressure of having to expand their cardiovascular capacity and prolonged local muscular endurance. While it doesn't make much sense to send a sprinter on 3-5 miles run, it does make sense to train a distance runners maximal velocity capabilities to a small extent, but it has to be done right or you are just training speed endurance qualities of the runner and that needs to be saved for later in the season.
speed requires skills, skills require abilities, and abilities are trainable. Speed is not solely dependent on muscle fibre composition. A fast running speed requires highly developed specific elastic and eccentric strength qualities which are balanced and coordinated. Something weight room speed buffs often overlook in their speed programs. Although maximum strength work will improve all other strength attributes (elastic, eccentric, etc.)
endurance requires volume, and volume requires training time to ever increase that volume. This is needed so the distance runner can do 6x1k with 3 min rest or mile repeats with 8-10 min rest to simulate race speed and fatigue in training.
training speed is nervous system training while training endurance is energy systems training. All running programs have both of these to some degree or other, and some are better than others. It's best if a coach is present to give guidance and feedback than just copying a workout of the net or out of a book. If you don't have a coach then get a training partner of similar abilities so you can give feedback to one another.
|
|
|
Post by newpackman on Dec 17, 2007 23:36:55 GMT -5
OK this time I actually did read all of it this time, and yet again it made alot of sence. Having said that I still believe that there is talent does play a larger part then you give it credit. Yes I do believe that endurance can be helped by talent. Look at guys like Adam Gocher, who can just run forever. As for sprinters, Asafa Powell has to have more talent then other guys, other wise why can't some other guy just simple beat his world record.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Dec 18, 2007 9:17:36 GMT -5
OK this time I actually did read all of it this time, and yet again it made alot of sence. Having said that I still believe that there is talent does play a larger part then you give it credit. Yes I do believe that endurance can be helped by talent. Look at guys like Adam Gocher, who can just run forever. As for sprinters, Asafa Powell has to have more talent then other guys, other wise why can't some other guy just simple beat his world record. What is talent? Genetic predisposition? If so, the expressed genetic make up of your body changes over time and more so with training. Hicham El Guerrouj has held the WR in mile for 8 years going on 9. Why doesn't someone just break his record? It's a myth that talent is inbred it is a by product early natural development where both nature and nurture take a role in forming expressed genetic material when one first under takes rigorous training. People want to talk about why people of west african descent are so fast in sprints, but fail to talk about the poverty that most of them suffer through even in the developed world that tends to lead them be more successful athletes. Kids with less money have less toys, and tend to be more active in their recreational activities despite sometimes lacking in nurishment. Go into any urban setting in the US or Caribbean and these poor kids in urban settings tend to be using playgrounds more so than there middle or upper class counterparts. Every child seeks fun and adventure and they will find no matter the circumstances. The same can be said of poor children in rural areas as well.
|
|
new2u
Contributor
Posts: 20
|
Post by new2u on Dec 18, 2007 13:34:38 GMT -5
No doubt genetic predisposition can play a big role, but there probably have been many athletes over the years that have limited themselves to particular events because of perceptions about race or geographic or even economic implications, that might have been able to do more in either the speed or endurance areas if they'd give them more of a chance. Jeremy Wariner has probably done a lot to help us in that regard recently, and maybe someone like that 200m guy Little about a decade ago. I know this stuff can even reach a team level - don't you know that redheads and tall kids NEVER sprint? Ok, maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but we all respond to cues we don't even realize. Maybe kids who don't fit the early childhood speed model but still display a pretty good deal of speed with initial training are the ones with the most potential to be great sprinters or middle-distance runners?
I was a 5'2", 102lb eighth-grader who had no chance in a 100m (upper-13's) and looked up to America's top distance runners of the 1970s. By the time I paid any attention to pure speed, or sub-1600m for that matter, I was 5'8" or 5'9" and 130's, and I couldn't break :28 for 200m but was a 1/2-way decent (4:40, 16:20) distance runner. I got down to :26.4 and :58.2 in workouts my senior year just by paying a little attention to speed, and ran a self-timed :56.8 without much more work on it as I approached my 19th birthday.
Could I have run under :53 in high school? Would that have made me a sprinter? Would it have made me a better distance runner? I can only answer that last question now - more work on pure speed would absolutely have made a positive difference in my distance races, regardless of whether I could compete at any exceptable level as a sprinter. I saw a bigger opportunity to develop in the gap between my endurance and that of a 2:10 marathoner than I saw in the difference between my sprint speed and his, so that's what I focused on - almost exclusively for 3 years. Ultimately, though, it's the speed difference that's the limiting factor, as mileage nears the maximum one can handle with reasonable intensity and without injury. You can't stretch speed you don't have in the first place.
Anyway, genetics seems to be much more individualized than we often assume, and much of what we attribute to genetics, in terms of speed, can be traced to lifestyle early in life as DB says. I have a brother who split :48.8 as a 5'8", 127lb senior. He was constantly running, climbing, jumping, playing like an African kid. He also ran 4:07 in high school and indoor 4:02 in college. One of the fastest kids on the playground and a virtually untrained 4:56 in 8th grade - talent? Yes, and...
But the big differences between speed and endurance, from a nature vs. nurture standpoint, are probably:
1) Almost all of us have a much better headstart in the nurture department when it comes to speed, than we do with our endurance, by the time we might begin to deliberately train it. We are then much further along the curve toward the point of diminishing returns on our effort to improve it - a generalization to be sure and we can all cite a few examples of kids who take off a full second or more after reaching full basic size, in 3 years, from their 100m. Those who come from an active, high altitude background do obviously have a better haed-start in the aerobic department, but they are a global minority for sure.
2) We get more years with a more responsive body, to develop endurance, maybe because of limitations aging brings sooner to neurological reflex or tendon flexibility (although I believe all have been proven to be held off greatly by consistently training them), or maybe because there are more associated energy systems to target for "endurance". I'm not going to pretend to be a scientist, and I'm not sure about these.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Dec 18, 2007 20:39:19 GMT -5
Our bodies start with neuromuscular and reflex development even before we are born. The first 2-3 years in a child's life are all about sorting out the neurons in our bodies. I am watching this first hand right now with a child of my own. It's amazing how infants develop motor skills, we are born with primitive motor patterns/programs and develop them throughout our life. What kids also miss these days are well rounded athletic backgrounds and a lack of motor skill development in recreational programs and pe classes. Parents wanting their kid to focus on one sport at early ages and Kids playing football in pads at the age of 8. These 2 examples give 3 different problems within athletic development of a child.
1. Narrowing of interests 2. Incorrect use of equipment 3. Organized athletics at too young of an age.
#1 creates a culture of specialists before they are ready to be specialists. Through trial and error the child will make the appropriate decisions about athletics.
#2 Why in hell do kids who weigh 60lbs need 15 more lbs of equipment that only screws up their basic motor patterns? I remember playing football as a child with no pads, tackle, on a mixture of grass, grass covered pavement, and loose gravel and never getting seriously injured or anyone else for that matter. At younger ages either adjust the equipment to an appropriate level or let the kids adjust themselves to applying the proper amount of force to use the equipment effectively. By this I mean, a younger kid who has an awkward looking basketball shot with a regulation ball on a regulation hoop don't change his shot form. If you want to change his form change the size of the hoop and/or the ball.
#3 Why on earth are their organized athletics at ages 5-10? Let the kids organize the games themselves. They'll have more fun and feel more competent at what they enjoy rather than doing what the adults want and learn more skills and abilities as well.
|
|
|
Post by redemption on Dec 19, 2007 11:01:17 GMT -5
new2u and dbandre,
I was just kinda looking at your times and they reminded me of my old teammate Sean Carmody. Also looking at everything dbandre says about the speed/endurance stuff also made me think about him. A good example of someone that has quite a bit of speed and endurance that wasn't exactly en elite runner is sean carmody. At state in cross his senior year he had a bad race and ran about 30 seconds slower than i think he could have. He was around 15:40+ i think. In track he could run a low 52 or high 51 if im not mistaken.
Myself, i had no speed at all. Then my coach Mr. Erb had me do a lot of 200's this last spring of 2007. I had never broken 60, not even at the state street mile. (first 1/4 is downhill) That was the summer of 2006...By spring with all the 200's that i did, i brought my 400 down to a 56.1. That wasn't even at my best i don't think. I've had another season of XC and more 200's coming up. I can't wait to see what i get to.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Dec 19, 2007 14:29:08 GMT -5
redemption:
there are many roads to rome, but if you are never training at or above race intensity you will never get much faster. The single biggest limiting factor is maximal speed. The next limiting factor is the endurance to carry a certain speed for a given distance. Coach Erb is fantastic and I know he's a mileage guy too more or less, but there is no doubt he notices the limitations of a distance runner with a slower maximal running velocity and recognizes that has to change in order to make them better and his teams better. Sometimes you have to the work the weaknesses in a runner a little bit more than one would like, but in the end if you never stray too far from the balance needed on the speed-endurance line for a persons event they will get faster. Sometimes however it is better to look beyond the current season and 2 or 3 years down the line.
|
|
|
Post by redemption on Dec 19, 2007 15:19:56 GMT -5
thats exactly what he did with me last spring. Speed was definantly not my strong point. He took it and hammered it to me. I'm glad he did because i think it helped me a lot this fall in finishing top 4 at state. The speed allowed me to run a 4:28 for the state street mile. It boosted my confidence although it was downhill. That confidence carried me through the season and to a 9:43 2 mile time trial that i practically ran alone just a couple weeks before state. Having the speed now gives me something to fall back on if my endurance doesn't hold.
|
|
|
Post by runner4ever on Dec 19, 2007 16:25:03 GMT -5
wow this was a lot more than i expected about winter training but thank you though for the advice dbandre, how far do you think training can go to increase speed before you have to have some natural ability?
|
|
|
Post by dxnlgn on Dec 22, 2007 13:43:23 GMT -5
...I hope this is more of what you are looking for. My coach and the kids that run regularly started out our freshmen years in the winter not going over 40 miles a week, and we just built on that. Now going into my junior year of track after our program had our best cross country season ever we took a week off after cross(and some even took two weeks). Then we transitioned with about 35-40 miles our first week. Since then we have gone 40-45-50-50-60-60 and then my next two weeks will go 70 70, and that will be our highest mile weeks of the year. After that we start going more anareobic and run 40-50-60-40-50-60 then after two cycles of that we start to taper. This time of year after our monday runs we are doing 10 X 100 meter strides on the football field at a "fast rhythm" is what my coach likes to call it.
On wednesdays we will do a fartlek at T pace which was determined by our V-dots. The pattern is 3 on 5 off X 5 or 6 depending on the weekly milage. Our five off though are still supposed to be at about 7 minute pace with out 3 on at about 5 20 pace. On fridays we go 25 percent ouf our weekly milage. The main goal for the winter I think is to stay healthy, not get worn down, and still be fit for track. Sounds easy, but it is not. You have to achieve that perfect balance. I think though if you trust your coaching and your training it helps you alot. When I am on my fifteen mile runs or my 70 miles a week the final goal should always be in mind, and I am always thinking what Tim Hurd is doing or what the kids from Belvidere North are doing, being that I am from Dixon. And about the natural talent thing I believe it is a myth to an extent some kids are just born with it. We have a kid on our team that can run a 23.3 200 and a 15:15 3 mile. Making his best race the 800 2 flat as a sophomore. Hope this helps. Even though im not a scientist like these other guys
|
|