If strength training and sport science have really come so far in the last 20 years, then why is it that so many track and field records from history past still stand? Why are the old Olympic lifting weight class records so good compared to today? Yes, yes, steroids, I know, but we would all be foolish to think that there aren’t athletes out there right now who aren’t taking advantage of some of the best “test-beating” pharmaceuticals that the black market has to offer in modern times.
Whether we like it or not, coaches and sport scientists back in the 1980’s and 1990’s were doing a lot of things far better than we are today, even without *gasp* HRV or functional movement screens.
How could this possibly be?!
Maybe some steroid usage isn’t to the extreme that it was in the 1980’s, (particularly on the women’s side of things… East Germany’s records are going to be around for a while). Even considering a few of the extreme cases, with the advance of all the internet knowledge and fancy technology toys, have we really come so far?
Looking at much of the training dogma today, there are a few “staples” of most current training design that perhaps aren’t so helpful or correct when it comes to becoming the best athlete one can be.
This article series is regarding myths that coaches might not need to stick so closely to when it comes to building a better system for their athlete’s performance. First on the list is the sequencing of strength and speed means in daily and weekly programming.
Myth: An athlete must do Olympic lifts or power training first in sequence and move to strength.
I don’t know if it was the NSCA, or exactly who came up with this one, but generally the ideology is presented that one must train speed first in a workout and then move towards strength. The reason for this thought is due to the fatigue that accumulates after heavy and intensive strength work; and that this fatigue can negatively influence the quality (and technique, if Olympic lifts are being performed) of the power and speed work of the workout.
Unfortunately, deadlifting 40kg isn’t going to be of a high enough neural magnitude to influence the quality of subsequent speed work
Sure, I get it. Don’t let weights mess with your ability to display speed and technique. I also understand that there are a lot of world record holders and Gold medalists who probably have always trained using the “speed to strength” sequence, and hit their genetic capability (or very close to it) without an issue.
The problem with the thought of “no strength before speed” is that, although strength work can debilitate the speed qualities of an athlete for a short period of time, there are short, medium and long term “potentiation” effects that are relatively equivalent to the overload of the strength stimulus that can offer a good benefit to subsequent exercises or training sessions.
Unfortunately, we only have hard research on short term effects (which regards “heavy to fast” work as a mixed bag of results). Anyone can make a straw-man against using strength work before speed: “Would doing 5×12 backsquats, and then immediately going for plyometric and speed work be a good idea?”
Probably not.
On the other hand, would doing 4×4 backsquats with a tendo unit at 80%, waiting until fatigue resided, and then performing an explosive exercise, such as jump squats, be fine? Sure, and it’s also very efficient. In the worst case here, the heavy backsquats would be a nice warmup for the jump squats, even if they weren’t “potentiated” into being higher (in my experience, they certainly wouldn’t be lower).
For acute, and short term work, working heavy to light can work well when competitive movement technique isn’t an issue. Doing heavy bench press, and then practicing your free throws might not work so great, but doing heavy bench, followed by reactive benching might be helpful for a shot putter.
Many trainers will instantly scoff at a workout if they see Olympic lifts anywhere but first, but I’ll tell you that some very successful training setups will take advantage of the potentiating effects of squats or deadlifts prior in the workout. The old school “Bigger Faster Stronger” method for training vertical jump power consisted of doing a sequence of deadlifts, then cleans, then snatches in the same workout. The deadlifts potentiated the cleans, and so on and so forth. Even if the cleans weren’t actually “better” because of the deadlifts, the total effect and neural rhythm of the work is very effective (not to mention the advantage of randomized learning to block leaning beyond the basic stage of skill acquisition), and has been one of the more potent sequences for vertical power in my own experience.
Aside from this, I have found that utilizing cleans right after heavy ½ squats is a good recipe for athletes to nearly hit themselves in the chin on their pulls (the bar feels like a feather after the ½ squats). I have also found French contrast work (strength to speed complex training) to be one of the best acute power methods out there. I’m not saying that you should just believe me “because I said so”, but know that I have had some good experience with select stacked methods putting strength before power and speed.
Good strength and track coaches have also realized that the last thing you do in a workout will influence how your body goes into the next workout. They also know that sometimes, to elude the dreaded plateau, a switch of timing of training elements can be just the ticket. One of the greatest track and field coaches of all time, Loren Seagrave, has recommended switching the order of the session training stimulus (moving from speed/plyos/strength to strength/plyos/speed) when athletes hit a plateau. If you have a chance to watch his presentation on his training of long jumper Dwight Phillips, I would consider it required viewing.
Some track coaches use plyos after a strength session because they beleive it helps recovery, as well as the ability of the athlete to walk into the next session feeling more spring in their step
All these things considered, we would be foolish to think that the only place in the workout for speed is at the very beginning.
I will say that although there may be some merit to complex training and short term potentiation, it isn’t good enough that everybody is using it. The whole “squat a 3RM right before you sprint a championship race” is perhaps one of the greatest White Buffaloes of training and coaching lore. Often referenced, but rarely, if ever seen. If it works so great, why aren’t more people trying it? Why aren’t there more squat stands sitting out in the warmup area of the Olympic finals?
I do think that short term sequencing of speed/strength can be useful, but I think the medium to long term effects are even more exciting.
Considering the 8-24 hour effect of strength work and dense, power oriented work is important to finding a way to pack more effective training into the weekly workload. In the same vein as the “don’t do strength before speed” mentality for a single workout; many also think this way in the scope of back to back workouts… if you taxed your system on Monday, then certainly you must have a low intensity rest day on Tuesday before you can train hard again, right? Not so fast.
Moving in the medium term from exercises of “high magnitude” to those of “low magnitude” can be a good idea, and leave athletes feeling fresh and ready to express power. Consider these few anecdotes that support occasions of high magnitude strength work supporting later speed work:
- Javier Sotomayor set his first world high jump record after performing heavy snatch triples in the morning, and he broke the WR in the evening. After this, heavy snatches the morning of big competitions was a tradition.
- The most successful D3 400m runner (not hurdler!) ever, Andrew Rock, preferred the feeling of power he would get from performing his lifting sessions in the AM, and sprinting in the afternoon.
- At my previous coaching position, the throwers would perform explosive (and often fairly heavy) lifting in the morning before traveling to meets and competing (being coached by Jake Clark). They loved it, and enjoyed a very successful season.
- Many track and field athletes will use a workout such as a fast 3×150, or 3×200 with walkback recovery to feel “ready” to run fast in a competition a few days later. The high magnitude and density of this effort has a beneficial effect on later speed oriented competition. Think of a 150m sprint as a “strength” effort in terms of neural breadth.
- Research has shown that working long to short in a single session can have growth hormone advantages over working short to long (Meckel 2011; a severe limitation of this study, however, is that all sprints were done at the same speed). An example would be starting at 250m fast, and then working down to 150m, and finishing with a few 100m efforts. The best place for this is generally intensive tempo speed work, in my experience (and is something you’ll also find in some elite TF coach workouts, such as Boo Shexnayder.) The long sprints offer a “wide-breadth” potentiation effect that warms one up better for the shorter bursts than traditional short, power warmup means in many cases.
Conclusion
In conclusion, training sequence is something that offers a whole new dimension to training that many don’t really think about. The undulating sequence of strength and speed within the training program is one that can really add a dynamic element to results. I don’t write this article to say that this is a required way of doing things (short term contrast in particular), but acknowledging the medium to long term effects of strength’s effect on speed can help any athlete achieve more, or break through a long-standing plateau.
References
Gouvêa, André Luiz, Igor Alexandre Fernandes, Eurico Peixoto César, Wagner Antônio Barbosa Silva, and Paulo Sergio Chagas Gomes. “The Effects of Rest Intervals on Jumping Performance: A Meta-analysis on Post-activation Potentiation Studies.” Journal of Sports Sciences 31.5 (2013): 459-67.
Meckel, Yoav, Dan Nemet, Sheli Bar-Sela, Shlomit Radom-Aizik, Dan M. Cooper, moran Sagiv, and Along Eliakim. “Hormonal and Inflammatory Responses to Different Types of Sprint Interval Training.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 25.8 (2011) 2161-169.
Free Training Guides!
Sign up for the newsletter, get your FREE eBooks, and receive weekly updates on cutting edge training information that will help take your knowledge of athletic performance to a new level.