Maximum Velocity 2003

[Cecelia Seiner]

Sprintingat maximum velocity is a one-of-kind stimulus. The combination of force, ground contact time, and coordination required cannot be replicated. For example, I can achieve the forces via unilateral hops, but the ground contact time will be much higher. I could come close to ground contact times via assisted bilateral jumps, but the jumps would be bilateral, and the forces would be lower. Furthermore, neither of these activities require a coordination demand which is even close to maximum velocity sprinting.

Training at maximum velocity also trains acceleration, because one must accelerate to reach maximum velocity. The only possibility for this not to happen is to be placed on a high speed treadmill, but that is even debatable, and not applicable to most.

Training acceleration does not necessarily guarantee maximum velocity will improve. If a person trained by only performing 10m sprints, an improvement in top end speed would be unlikely. However, if the same person also did 40m sprints on another day, then improvements in top end speed would be likely. Yes, there are probably exceptions to this, but in general, training acceleration with an expectation that maximum velocity will improve is a faulty strategy. I know because I have made this mistake more times than I would like to admit.

While I try to address these three items through my social media presence and writing, there is no question that I spend the most energy addressing sprinting at maximum velocity. I think specialization and lack of free play are structural issues that require a shift in society. In other words, these are really, really, BIG problems. Incorporating sprinting is something that can be done within our current structure that does not completely fix it, but does make it better.

Even in a hypothetical piece where I pushed the limits of maximum velocity dosage, I finished with stating that having a weekly acceleration-focused day is logical. Furthermore, one of the most important lessons I have learned in the nuts and bolts of writing track and field training programs comes from Marc Mangiacotti: train acceleration in some way, shape, or form every single training session. This can be done via the exercises listed below, which can be appropriately placed in maximal, submaximal, and regeneration training sessions:

Where is the breaking point for when a sprint workout shifts from becoming acceleration focused to maximum velocity focused? The standard measurement in track and field training is 30 meters, but that does not really tell the story. Defining if the focus is early acceleration, late acceleration, peak velocity, or exposure to speed decay (what happens post-peak velocity) is probably a better structure, and as one works their way up this chain, the previous item(s) are being addressed.

Like many coaches, I enjoy research and I use it to assist with creating generalizations for program design. However, I also know that individualizing training as much as possible tends to lead to higher achievement. It should be noted that most of my career has consisted of 40:1 athlete to coach ratios where I was responsible for three event groups (sprints, hurdles, high jump). Because of this, I have experience with trying to meet the instructional demands of a large group while maintaining smooth workflow within the various constraints of our facility. So how can one individualize in a large group setting in regard to sprint training?

The difficult part is providing each athlete with technical feedback. There is no question it can be overwhelming, but it is one a coach must undertake because it is a great way to build trust with the athlete. People respond well to people who show interest in them. Programming, at least at the high school level, does not have to be nearly as difficult as most athletes will fit into a relatively general progression. For example, a simple off-season training program for a field/court sport could be:

In addition, on acceleration days, I would include deceleration-acceleration and/or change of direction work after the sprints. On maximum velocity days, I would include curved and/or serpentine running before (and/or after) the sprints. I have noticed athletes respond well to linear sprinting after a rep or two of curve work. Creative coaches could even combine these concepts together: timing 20m coming out of a zero degree cut or timing a 10m fly coming off of a curve. The possibilities are endless.

My guess is a program such as this would meet the needs of at least 80% of high school athletes. For the other 20%, who tend to be veteran athletes in the program, advanced variations such as longer sprints or sprint-float-sprints may be required.

The test becomes a 30m fly with a 20m run-in. We know most young athletes hit top speed somewhere between 20 and 30 meters, but the comparison of the three splits would give a coach a better idea of where peak velocity is occurring. The reason I say better idea is that it cannot be said where peak velocity is occurring unless you have an instrument which measures instantaneous velocity, which timing gates do not. To illustrate, here is an example of splits from a high school female I have worked with.

Many would make the assertion that peak velocity must have occurred during the split of 1.33, but that is not necessarily true. The only guarantee about an instantaneous velocity is that it has to equal the average velocity at one or more points during the interval (this is the Mean Value Theorem in calculus). In other words, peak velocity could have occurred during an interval with a lower average velocity. An example similar to this is as follows:

The takeaway from this is that a coach can use this type of test once every four to six weeks to help determine where peak velocity may be occurring, and then target that interval, and possibly go beyond it, during training. In the example above, I walked away confident that the athlete received training at maximum velocity, and it helped me construct future training sessions for her next block.

I have had numerous conversations with field and court sport coaches who are all about sprinting, but only work up to 20m or 30m. Their reasoning is that their athletes will rarely sprint beyond 20, so why train beyond it. I typically respond by asking how many times they have seen an athlete in their sport with a barbell on their back during the game.

A coach cannot argue against maximum velocity training because it is not specific, but think squatting/deadlifting/pulling/pressing is the answer to every question. Training is often at least a generation or more removed from sport, and often includes items which are an incredible stimulus, but do not occur in competition. We need to be okay with this from both a weight room perspective and a sprint perspective!

Both the aforementioned study by Nagahara and another (21 males, 100 m bests 11.27 +/- .27) give vertical forces of each step over the course of a 60m sprint. The results show logarithmic growth, meaning that forces are increasing at a decreasing rate. The visual below will help make this clear, as the velocity curve shown earlier is also logarithmic.

In both studies, vertical forces began to level off between steps 13 and 15, meaning that beyond this, increases in force were relatively small. For spatial reference, most high school males will hit the 20m mark between 12 and 14 steps, and the 30m mark between 16 and 19 steps (exceptions exist of course).

To digest what I will outline here, it may be helpful to view every step in the sprint as an individual repetition. If we were dealing with an athlete in the study that was near the upper end in terms of 100m performance, and the workout of the day was 20 meter sprints, he would not get any repetitions of steps where forces begin to level off. If the workout was 30m sprints, he would get around four. If it was extended to 40m sprints, around eight or nine total. The point here is that just beyond 20 meters is where forces and contact times are starting to provide a unique stimulus, and athletes should be exposed to that stimulus! While there is merit for sprints of 20m and lower (improving acceleration is important), not going beyond that distance is definitely leaving something on the table!

The graph below shows an exponential curve to provide a visual, but it IS NOT an accurate depiction of what was found in the study. For our purposes, we just need to understand the exponential behavior of vertical force as the percentage of maximum velocity increases. The function below shows mean vertical force increasing at an increasing rate (the slope of the curve is getting steeper as the percentage of max velocity increases).

The reason why this is important is that if athletes do not get higher percentages of maximum velocity (especially 90% and above), they are missing out on the exponential increase in force. As stated earlier, one of the Nagahara studies found the participants hit 95% of maximum velocity at 23.1m. Like before, if sprints are capped between 20m and 30m, the exposure to the portion of exponential increase in mean vertical force is minimal.

Rob Assise has 17 years of experience teaching mathematics and coaching track and field at Homewood-Flossmoor High School. He has also coached football and cross country. Rob owns and operates Re-Evolution Athletics LLCT, which provides private/small group/remote training, digital products, and consultation. You can find his additional writings at Track Football Consortium, Just Fly Sports, and ITCCCA. Reach Rob via e-mail at robert...@gmail.com or Twitter @HFJumps.

So if a high school athletes is sprinting twice a week and using the template above can you throw in a couple of runs in the 50-100m range to cover their bases and get some effect at the longer distances? Fantastic article too

Really we have come to accept certain things as being correct, right, really absolute, without investigating. If you reach maxV, top end speed in the 100m, surely you are decelerating anything after 70-80, because that is typically the distance folks associate with top end speed on the elite level, forget lower levels, that is 50-60, let it be said. So if that is the case, anything after those distances for those levels, is deceleration, so there is no closing speed in the 200, 400m, if one reaches maxV at a certain point, again what is that certain point and what are all of the variables that effect this? Because whenever there is an effect, you will have a cause. For example what caused Noah to break the American record in the 200m, the effect, was the American record. Could he possibly have been decelerating for 120 meters, once he reached maxV at 80 meters? I would say there is no way, he breaks the record if that were the case.

3a8082e126